Orla Mining Announces Positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Camino Rojo Underground Project
High-Margin Growth Beyond Current Open-Pit Operation
All amounts expressed in
Camino Rojo Underground PEA Highlights
-
Underground Sulphide Expansion Beyond Oxides Open Pit : The PEA outlines a pathway to develop an additional, standalone operation at Camino Rojo beyond the current open pit heap leach operation through development of an underground mining operation supported by its own crushing, grinding, and flotation circuits producing saleable concentrates. -
Robust Economics Across Gold Price Scenarios:
- Net Present Value ("NPV")5% of
$1.3 billion and 30% internal rate of return ("IRR") at$3,100 /oz gold price (after-tax). - NPV5% of
$3.3 billion and 61% IRR at$5,000 /oz gold price (after-tax)1.
- Net Present Value ("NPV")5% of
-
Capital Efficient Growth Opportunity: The Project demonstrates strong capital efficiency with an after-tax NPV to initial capital ratio of 5.5:1 at
$5,000 /oz gold, highlighting the leverage of the underground expansion to gold prices. -
Strong Production Profile and Optimal Margins: Average annual gold production over the first 10 years is projected to be 215,000 ounces, with an expected average all-in sustaining cost ("AISC")2 of
$1,304 per payable ounce of gold. - Phased De ‑ Risking Strategy: A phased de-risking program through 2026 will advance optimization studies, exploration decline development, and staged underground drilling to build technical and resource confidence ahead of a construction decision. The Company intends to complete a pre-feasibility study ("PFS") for the Project in 2027.
-
Exploration Growth Potential Beyond Current Study: Since 2020, 110,000 metres of drilling have advanced
Camino Rojo into a de-risked underground project with over 4 Moz gold equivalent ("AuEq")3 in measured and indicated ("M&I") Mineral Resources, defining higher-grade zones, extending mineralization at depth with Zone 22, and reinforcing strong district-scale growth potential.
"A multi-year program of drilling and test work underpins this initial underground expansion study, highlighting the potential opportunity beyond the current oxide heap leach operation. The work represents an important milestone as the Project advances towards a future construction decision. Supported by a solid base case PEA and with the deposit remaining open in Zone 22, the Project offers continued growth potential and the basis for a multi-decade mining complex in
-
Table 1: Camino Rojo Underground PEA
|
PEA Summary (Average / Total LOM) |
Units |
Values |
|
Throughput Target – ROM Avg Per Day |
tpd |
8,000 |
|
Mineral Resources Projected Feed |
M tonnes |
37.2 |
|
Mineral Resources Projected Feed Gold Grade |
g/t Au |
2.70 |
|
Mineral Resources Projected Feed |
g/t Ag |
11.5 |
|
Mineral Resources Projected Feed Zinc Grade |
% Zn |
0.39 |
|
Mineral Resources Projected Feed Gold Equivalent Grade |
g/t AuEq |
2.86 |
|
Contained Gold in Feed |
M ounces |
3.22 |
|
Contained Gold Equivalent in Feed |
M ounces |
3.42 |
|
|
years |
17 |
|
Average Gold Recovery to Concentrate |
% |
87 % |
|
Total Gold Production |
M ounces |
2.80 |
|
Total Gold Equivalent Production |
M ounces |
2.97 |
|
Total Payable Gold |
M ounces |
2.48 |
|
Total Payable Gold Equivalent |
M ounces |
2.61 |
|
PEA Summary (Average Year 1 to Year 10) |
Units |
Values |
|
Average Annual Gold Production |
k ounces |
215 |
|
Average Annual Gold Equivalent Production |
k ounces |
228 |
|
Average Annual Payable Gold |
k ounces |
190 |
|
Average Annual Payable Gold Equivalent |
k ounces |
201 |
|
Operating Costs (Average LOM) |
Units |
Values |
|
Processing Plant |
$/t processed |
|
|
Paste Plant |
$/t processed |
|
|
Tailings Storage Facility ("TSF") |
$/t processed |
|
|
Mining |
$/t processed |
|
|
G&A |
$/t processed |
|
|
Total Operating Costs |
$/t processed |
|
|
Total Cash Cost1 |
$/ounce Au |
|
|
AISC1 |
$/oz Au payable |
|
|
Capital Costs |
Units |
Values |
|
Processing Plant |
$million |
306.0 |
|
Paste Plant (Initial Cement |
$million |
5.8 |
|
Tailing Storage Facility |
$million |
6.2 |
|
|
$million |
203.2 |
|
Contingency |
$million |
86.8 |
|
Total Initial Capital Cost |
$million |
608.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Evaluation (Base Case) |
Units |
Values |
|
Gold Price Assumption |
$/ounce Au |
|
|
Silver Price Assumption |
$/ounce Ag |
|
|
Zinc Price Assumption |
$/lbs |
|
|
IRR, Pre-Tax |
% |
47.7 % |
|
IRR, After-Tax |
% |
30.2 % |
|
NPV @ 5% (Pre-Tax) |
$million |
|
|
NPV @ 5% (After-Tax) |
$million |
|
|
Pay-Back Period (After-Tax) |
years |
3.2 |
Table 2: PEA Economic Sensitivity Analysis
|
Gold Price ($/oz) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
After-Tax NPV5% ($M) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After-Tax IRR (%) |
7.7 % |
19.0 % |
30.2 % |
37.1 % |
45.2 % |
61.2 % |
|
Payback |
7.9 |
4.8 |
3.2 |
2.6 |
2.1 |
1.5 |
Note: Gold equivalent (AuEq) reflects total metal presented on an equivalent basis. The Company uses conversion ratios for calculating gold equivalent for its silver and zinc production, which are calculated by multiplying the volumes of silver and zinc by the respective assumed metal prices, recoveries (varies), and dividing the resulting figure by assumed gold price. The following metal prices and recoveries (averaged) were used:
-
Gold:
$3,100 /oz and 87% recovery -
Silver:
$37.50 /oz and 75% recovery -
Zinc:
$1.20 /lb and 40% recovery
The PEA is preliminary in nature, it includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves, and there is no certainty that the preliminary economic assessment will be realized. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The PEA has been completed independent of the Camino Rojo open pit project and is treated as a completely separate development project.
The PEA will be included as a standalone development option as part of a broader technical report for
PEA Overview
The PEA was prepared by a team of independent industry experts who are Qualified Persons under NI 43-101, led by
The PEA was completed using base case commodity prices of
Further details on the Mineral Resource estimates are provided below under "Mineral Resource Summary".
Mining Overview
The PEA contemplates a stand-alone underground mining operation accessed through a single portal and developed through two primary ramps. The mine design incorporates cemented rockfill during pre-production and transitions to paste backfill during steady-state operations to optimize ground support and stope sequencing.
Mining is primarily longitudinal with a central retreat strategy, dividing wider mineralized zones into multiple horizons. Larger stopes are designed to support higher and more stable production rates while concurrent mining of multiple lenses provides operational flexibility and consistent production. Multi-face development is planned to occur in advance of full production to ensure mining readiness and an efficient ramp-up.
The projected feed contemplated in the
Metallurgy & Processing Overview
Geometallurgical modelling of the Camino Rojo underground Mineral Resources identified six domains captured into three categories: Non-Refractory, Refractory, and Zone 22. Refractory zones represent approximately 80% of the tonnage and the material therein is not amendable to direct cyanidation.
Earlier concepts and Mineral Resource estimates contemplated pre-treatment of the refractory material (pressure oxidation) prior to cyanidation. The Study assumes concentrate production and sale as the preferred approach, supported by an independent concentrate market assessment which reviewed current market conditions, payables, and treatment terms relevant to the concentrates considered in the PEA. As a result, the sale of three concentrates (pyrite, gold, zinc) has been evaluated in the PEA, with further metallurgical optimization and market studies to be advanced during the next phase of studies.
The process plant is designed for a nominal throughput of 8,000 tonnes per day, operating 24 hours per day with an assumed availability of 92%. Average gold recovered in concentrate across all domains is estimated at 87% of the gold contained in the mined ore.
The flowsheet considers primary crushing followed by crushed material stockpiling and reclaim. Grinding will consist of primary and secondary stages, featuring a SAG mill with pebble crushing, and a ball mill operating in closed circuit with hydro-cyclones. Selective flotation circuits (carbon flotation, gold flotation, zinc flotation, and arsenopyrite flotation) will produce separate gold, zinc, and pyrite concentrates, which will be filtered prior to storage and load-out. A carbon flotation stage has been considered to remove high organic carbon material and reduce downstream reagent consumption, improving overall process efficiency.
The pyrite concentrate will be transported in bulk, and the gold and zinc concentrates will be containerized for shipping.
Tailings will be thickened and directed to a paste backfill plant for filtration and to provide the underground mining operation with paste backfill. Surplus filtered tailings will be directed to a dry-stack tailings storage facility.
See Appendix for an illustration of the PEA flowsheet.
Concentrate Market Assessment
An assessment of current market conditions for gold-bearing pyrite, gold, and zinc concentrates was conducted as part of the PEA by an independent concentrate marketing advisor. The assessment included a review of treatment and refining charges, payable terms, impurity thresholds, and transportation costs for concentrates with similar metallurgical characteristics. The analysis also considered recent market transactions and long-term demand trends for sulphide concentrates.
Based on this review, the PEA incorporates payable assumptions and treatment terms consistent with current market conditions for comparable concentrates. While concentrate markets remain subject to variability in metal prices, treatment charges, and smelter capacity, the Study assumes commercially reasonable terms supported by the independent assessment.
Orla intends to continue advancing concentrate market assessments and discussions in parallel with metallurgical optimization and optimization studies through 2026.
Mineral Resource Projected Feed – Production Profile
Over the first 10-years of the mine life, the average annual gold and gold equivalent production in concentrate is projected to be 215,000 ounces and 228,000 ounces, respectively, and the average annual payable gold and payable gold equivalent is projected to be 190,000 ounces and 201,000 ounces, respectively. An annual PEA Underground LOM Summary is presented in Appendix.
Capital Costs Overview
The initial capital cost estimate for the Project totals
The estimate assumes contractor-performed development mining and is configured as a stand-alone underground development adjacent to the existing heap leach operation. The estimate also includes provisions for a new powerline and associated infrastructure to support the estimated power demand.
Consistent with a Class 4 estimate, growth and provisional allowances have been considered and included throughout the estimate, and then a contingency averaging 17% of the total initial capital cost was applied across the entire estimate.
The initial capital cost estimate excludes escalation, pre-construction expenditures (including PFS and feasibility study work), permitting, and the pre-development exploration decline. The exploration decline is estimated to cost between
Table 3: Initial Capital Cost Summary (excl. value added tax)
|
Capital Costs |
Values ($M) |
|
Processing Plant |
306.0 |
|
Paste Plant (Initial CRF) |
5.8 |
|
Tailing Storage Facility |
6.2 |
|
|
203.2 |
|
Contingency |
86.8 |
|
Total Initial Capital Cost |
608.1 |
Sustaining capital4 over the life of mine is estimated at
Table 4: Sustaining Capital Cost Summary (excl. value added tax)
|
Sustaining Capital Costs |
Values ($M) |
|
Processing Plant |
64.5 |
|
Paste Plant |
71.1 |
|
Tailing Storage Facility |
9.2 |
|
|
344.2 |
|
Total Sustaining Capital Cost |
489.0 |
|
Closure and Rehabilitation |
30.0 |
Operating Costs Overview
Operating costs were estimated by DRA (process, infrastructure), SLR (tailings storage facility, paste backfill plant) and Entech (mining).
Mining costs are based on contractor rates derived from comparable underground operations and are applied to scheduled production physicals from detailed mine planning models.
Processing and paste plant operating costs were developed using industry standard unit rates applicable to precious metals processing plants.
Quantities and cost inputs were developed from multiple sources, including:
- Metallurgical test work results;
- Supplier quotations;
- Energy pricing assumptions provided by Orla;
- DRA and SLR benchmark and historical cost data; and
- First-principles calculations for key consumables, including grinding media and reagents.
Operating cost estimates are consistent with an AACE Class 4 level of accuracy, with an expected range of ±30–40%.
These cost assumptions underpin the projected LOM AISC of
Table 5: Operating Cost Summary
|
Operating Cost |
LOM Costs ($M) |
LOM Costs ($/t Processed) |
LOM Costs ($/oz Au Payable) |
|
Processing Plant |
417.6 |
11.23 |
169 |
|
Paste Plant |
226.4 |
6.09 |
91 |
|
TSF |
19.0 |
0.51 |
8 |
|
UG Mining |
1,767.1 |
47.51 |
713 |
|
G&A |
202.0 |
5.43 |
82 |
|
Total Operating Costs |
2,632.2 |
70.77 |
1,062 |
|
Freight and TC/RC |
438.0 |
11.77 |
177 |
|
By-product Credits |
(425.4) |
(11.44) |
(172) |
|
Total Cash Costs |
2,644.8 |
71.10 |
1,067 |
|
Royalties |
153.4 |
4.12 |
62 |
|
Sustaining Capital |
489.0 |
13.15 |
197 |
|
Closure Cost |
30.0 |
0.81 |
12 |
|
AISC |
3,317.2 |
89.18 |
1,339 |
- Advance the Project towards a PFS, targeted for completion during 2027.
- Develop an exploration decline to support underground exploration drilling commencing as early as 2026, subject to the approval of the environmental assessment permit application (Manifestación de Impacto Ambiental, "MIA") submitted in
November 2024 , and the accompanying change of land use permit (Cambio deUso de Suelo , "CUS") - Implement a staged underground drilling program advancing alongside ramp development commencing in 2027. Build geotechnical, metallurgical, and resource confidence ahead of a construction decision.
- Continue permitting process for the underground operations (baseline data collection and studies)
Mineral Resource Summary
The Mineral Resources Estimate shown here has an effective date of
Table 6: MCR Mineral Resources
|
Operation |
Resource Type |
Category |
Kt |
Average Grade |
Contained Metal |
NSR Cut-Off Grade ($/t) |
||||||
|
Gold (g/t) |
Silver (g/t) |
Zn (ppm)* |
AuEq (g/t) |
000 oz Au |
000 oz Ag |
million lb Zn |
000 oz AuEq |
|||||
|
|
Heap Leach |
Measured |
2,768 |
0.79 |
16.21 |
- |
0.85 |
71 |
1,442 |
- |
76 |
8.44 |
|
Indicated |
37,309 |
0.69 |
13.10 |
- |
0.74 |
823 |
15,708 |
- |
893 |
|||
|
M&I |
40,077 |
0.69 |
13.31 |
- |
0.75 |
893 |
17,151 |
- |
969 |
|||
|
Inferred |
1,523 |
0.74 |
12.26 |
- |
0.80 |
36 |
600 |
- |
39 |
|||
|
Mill |
Measured |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
14.06 |
|
|
Indicated |
2,213 |
0.85 |
8.91 |
3,947 |
0.94 |
60 |
634 |
19 |
67 |
|||
|
M&I |
2,213 |
0.85 |
8.91 |
3,947 |
0.94 |
60 |
634 |
19 |
67 |
|||
|
Inferred |
71 |
0.85 |
8.69 |
2,951 |
0.95 |
2 |
20 |
0 |
2 |
|||
|
Total |
Measured |
2,768 |
0.79 |
16.21 |
- |
0.85 |
71 |
1,442 |
0 |
76 |
8.44 to 14.06 |
|
|
Indicated |
39,522 |
0.69 |
12.86 |
221 |
0.76 |
883 |
16,342 |
19 |
960 |
|||
|
M&I |
42,290 |
0.70 |
13.08 |
207 |
0.76 |
953 |
17,785 |
19 |
1,036 |
|||
|
Inferred |
1,594 |
0.74 |
12.10 |
131 |
0.80 |
38 |
620 |
0 |
41 |
|||
|
Underground Project |
Heap Leach |
Measured |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
57 to 66 |
|
Indicated |
3,298 |
2.54 |
12.23 |
- |
2.66 |
269 |
1,297 |
- |
282 |
|||
|
M&I |
3,298 |
2.54 |
12.23 |
- |
2.66 |
269 |
1,297 |
- |
282 |
|||
|
Inferred |
198 |
2.39 |
14.62 |
- |
2.53 |
15 |
93 |
- |
16 |
|||
|
Mill |
Measured |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
63 to 72 |
|
|
Indicated |
45,965 |
2.53 |
11.28 |
3,783 |
2.7 |
3,745 |
16,674 |
383 |
3,985 |
|||
|
M&I |
45,965 |
2.53 |
11.28 |
3,783 |
2.7 |
3,745 |
16,674 |
383 |
3,985 |
|||
|
Inferred |
3,974 |
2.51 |
10.95 |
6,613 |
2.82 |
321 |
1,398 |
58 |
360 |
|||
|
Total |
Measured |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
57 to 72 |
|
|
Indicated |
49,263 |
2.53 |
11.35 |
3,530 |
2.69 |
4,014 |
17,971 |
383 |
4,267 |
|||
|
M&I |
49,263 |
2.53 |
11.35 |
3,530 |
2.69 |
4,014 |
17,971 |
383 |
4,267 |
|||
|
Inferred |
4,172 |
2.50 |
11.12 |
6,299 |
2.80 |
336 |
1,491 |
58 |
376 |
|||
|
Stockpiles** |
Measured |
588 |
0.34 |
20.25 |
- |
0.34 |
6 |
383 |
- |
6 |
(0.21 g/t Au) |
|
|
Indicated |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|||
|
M&I |
588 |
0.34 |
20.25 |
- |
0.34 |
6 |
383 |
- |
6 |
|||
|
Inferred |
0 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|||
|
Total |
588 |
0.34 |
20.25 |
- |
0.34 |
6 |
383 |
- |
6 |
|||
|
Total |
Measured |
3,355 |
0.71 |
16.91 |
- |
0.76 |
77 |
1,825 |
- |
82 |
8.44 to 72 |
|
|
Indicated |
88,785 |
1.71 |
12.02 |
2,057 |
1.83 |
4,897 |
34,313 |
402 |
5,227 |
|||
|
M&I |
92,141 |
1.68 |
12.20 |
1,982 |
1.79 |
4,974 |
36,138 |
402 |
5,309 |
|||
|
Inferred |
5,766 |
2.02 |
11.39 |
4,594 |
2.25 |
374 |
2,111 |
58 |
417 |
|||
|
Notes: |
|
1. Definitions from the |
|
2. Mineral Resources are estimated in the optimized pit shell at a net smelter return ("NSR") cut-off value of |
|
3. Mineral Resources are estimated using a long-term price of |
|
4. Stockpiles are using a cut-off grade of 0.21 g/t Au based on a long-term price of |
|
5. Bulk density varies from 2.40 t/m3 to 2.67 t/m3 for the mineralization and estimation domains and 2.0 t/m3 for the overburden. |
|
6. Metallurgical recoveries vary according to geometallurgical domains and process type (Leach or Mill) and are either a constant or formula based. Heap leach recoveries range from 40% to 70% for gold and 11% to 34% for silver. For mill flotation concentrate, recoveries range from 80% to 89% for gold, 52% to 86% for silver, and 87% to 90% for zinc; zinc recovery is assumed to be 0% for the Transition and S1a_CAR geometallurgical domains. |
|
7. The NSR is calculated by material type with the following formulas: |
|
Heap Leach Material NSR ($/t) = (Au grade (g/t) x (((2,800-1.69) x Au recovery Heap Leach x 0.999 x (1-0.03)) / 31.103477)) + (Ag grade (g/t) x (((33-1.69) x Ag recovery Heap Leach x 0.98 x (1-0.03)) / 31.103477)) |
|
Mill Material NSR ($/t) = (Au NSP ($/g Au) x Au grade (g/t)) + (Ag NSP ($/g Ag) x Ag grade (g/t)) + (Zn NSP ($/g Zn) x Zn grade (ppm)) |
|
8. The gold equivalent (AuEq) by material types are calculated with the following formulas, including the recoveries in Item 5: |
|
Heap Leach Material AuEq = Au grade (g/t) + (Ag NSP ($/g) / Au NSP ($/g) x Ag grade (g/t)). |
|
Mill Material AuEq = Au grade (g/t) + (Ag NSP ($/g) / Au NSP ($/g) x Ag grade (g/t)) + ((Zn NSP ($/lb) x 2,204.62 / 100 / Au NSP ($/g)) x Zn grade (ppm) / 10,000)). |
|
9. Mineral Resources are constrained by an optimized resource pit shell and underground resource panels with a minimum mining width of 2 m for long-hole stoping and 5 m for cut-and-fill. |
|
10. Mineral Resources are inclusive of Mineral Reserves. |
|
11. Numbers may not add due to rounding. |
|
12. Inferred Mineral Resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves. |
|
* Zinc is only considered in the Mill scenario, and its grade is averaged over the final total numbers. |
|
** AuEq depends on net smelter price ("NSP") parameters that vary by geometallurigcal domain, which cannot be defined for stockpiled material. Instead of a calculated AuEq value, the stockpiles use the Au value for the AuEq, which does not include the contribution from Ag. |
Significant Upside Growth Opportunities for Discoveries and Mine Life Extensions
Since 2020, Orla has completed more than 110,000 metres of near mine drilling at Camino Rojo, advancing the project from a large open pit concept to a targeted underground development supported by 4 Moz Au in Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources. Drilling oriented in the opposite azimuth to historical campaigns generated a critical complementary dataset that strengthened the geological and resource models, delineated higher-grade zones, extended mineralization at depth, and ultimately led to the discovery of Zone 22.
The updated Mineral Resource includes 331 koz of gold in the Measured and Indicated category and 110 koz of gold in the Inferred category (382 koz AuEq and 135 koz AuEq, respectively) within Zone 22. This represents 8.2% of the Measured and Indicated category and 32.7% of the Inferred category of the global Mineral Resources, indicating that the mineralized system remains open at depth and highlighting the potential for further expansion. Recent deeper drilling confirms that the Zone 22 system, located entirely below the Caracol Formation, continues into limestone hosted polymetallic (Au-Ag-Zn ± Cu ± Pb) mineralization, with the deposit remaining open at depth and along strike. Selective deeper exploration and planned underground definition drilling aim to further refine mineralization definition and increase confidence (derisking) in potential economic zones. In parallel, targeted drilling will be considered with the goal of extending and growing the deposit, while regional targets across the property continue to return encouraging results. Orla's disciplined exploration strategy supports a robust underground Project and underscores the expansion potential of
Development Phase Drilling to Advance and Derisk the
Currently, the planned drilling for 2026 aims to collect geotechnical, hydrological, and metallurgical data supporting technical studies and underground design. Following expected permit approval in 2026, ramp development will be paired with a staged underground definition drilling program to progressively derisk the Project.
Definition drilling, planned for H2 2027, will target 15–25 metre spacing from footwall drill bays to upgrade resources to Measured Mineral Resources category, refine geometallurgical domains, define mineralization boundaries, and support bulk sampling. This phased approach will strengthen the geological model and increase resource confidence ahead of full underground mining.
Data Verification & QA/QC
Technical Report
Additional supporting details regarding the information in this news release will be included in the Technical Report. The Technical Report will be prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 and filed on SEDAR+ and EDGAR under the Company's profile at www.sedarplus.ca and www.sec.gov, respectively, within 45 days of this news release. It will include further details on qualifications, assumptions, exclusions and risks that relate to the details of this news release, including the underground PEA as a separate, walled-off development option, Mineral Resource estimate (open pit and underground) and Mineral Reserve estimate for the current open pit
Qualified Persons Statement
The scientific and technical information in this news release related to the Study were provided, reviewed and approved by the authors listed in Table 7, who are Qualified Persons as defined under NI 43-101.
All other scientific and technical information in this news release was also reviewed and approved by Mr.
Table 7: Camino Rojo PEA Qualified Person
|
QP Name |
Company |
Qualification |
Main Area of Responsibility |
|
|
|
|
Lead author, infrastructure, costing (except mining) and economic analysis |
|
|
|
|
Mineral Resources |
|
|
|
|
Metallurgical testing |
|
|
|
FAusIMM |
Recovery methods – Process plant |
|
|
|
|
Mining methods and mining costs |
|
|
|
|
TSF, waste and water management |
|
|
|
|
Environmental, permitting, and social |
|
|
RMS, part of |
|
|
Cautionary Statement Regarding the PEA
The reader is advised that the PEA summarized in this news release is only a conceptual study of the potential viability of the Project, and the economic and technical viability of the Project and its estimated Mineral Resources has not been demonstrated. The PEA is preliminary in nature and provides only an initial, high-level review of the Project's potential and design options; there is no certainty that the PEA will be realized. The PEA conceptual mine plan and economic model include numerous assumptions and Mineral Resource estimates including Inferred Mineral Resource estimates. Inferred Mineral Resource estimates are considered to be too speculative geologically to have any economic considerations applied to such estimates. There is no guarantee that Inferred Mineral Resource estimates will be converted to Indicated or Measured Mineral Resources, or that Indicated or Measured Mineral Resources can be converted to Mineral Reserves. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability, and as such there is no guarantee the Project economics described herein will be achieved. Mineral Resource estimates may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, title, taxation, socio-political, marketing, or other relevant risks, uncertainties and other factors, as more particularly described herein and to be described in the Technical Report.
In accordance with applicable Canadian securities laws, all Mineral Resource estimates disclosed or referenced in this news release have been prepared in accordance with the disclosure standards of and have been classified in accordance with CIM's "Definition Standards for Mineral Resources and Reserves". Under Canadian securities rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of an economic analysis, except for a preliminary economic assessment as defined under NI 43-101. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an Inferred Mineral Resource exists or is economically or legally mineable.
About Orla Mining Ltd.
Orla's corporate strategy is to acquire, develop, and operate mineral properties where the Company's expertise can substantially increase stakeholder value. The Company has three material projects, consisting of two operating mines and one development project, all 100% owned by the Company: (1)
Appendix
Camino Rojo PEA Underground LOM
|
|
Units |
Total |
|
|
|
|
Y3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Projected |
Mt |
37.2 |
|
|
2.9 |
2.6 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
2.9 |
3.1 |
2.8 |
2.9 |
2.4 |
1.9 |
1.7 |
1.1 |
0.7 |
0.3 |
0.0 |
|
|
Gold Grade |
g/t |
2.70 |
|
|
2.48 |
2.61 |
2.67 |
2.46 |
2.77 |
2.80 |
2.75 |
2.65 |
2.73 |
2.66 |
2.77 |
2.82 |
2.77 |
2.99 |
2.84 |
2.88 |
2.22 |
|
|
|
g/t |
11.5 |
|
|
11.5 |
13.2 |
12.7 |
11.9 |
11.7 |
10.9 |
12.1 |
11.3 |
12.2 |
11.7 |
10.7 |
9.3 |
10.1 |
10.8 |
8.2 |
6.5 |
9.2 |
|
|
Zinc Grade |
% |
0.39 |
|
|
0.37 |
0.40 |
0.38 |
0.37 |
0.36 |
0.35 |
0.38 |
0.38 |
0.42 |
0.39 |
0.47 |
0.43 |
0.43 |
0.40 |
0.34 |
0.26 |
0.31 |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
Contained Gold |
K oz |
3,223 |
|
|
233 |
222 |
249 |
231 |
260 |
263 |
259 |
267 |
243 |
248 |
215 |
174 |
154 |
109 |
68 |
27 |
2 |
|
|
Contained Silver |
K oz |
13,705 |
|
|
1,081 |
1,121 |
1,180 |
1,118 |
1,101 |
1,025 |
1,133 |
1,137 |
1,090 |
1,094 |
832 |
572 |
560 |
395 |
197 |
61 |
7 |
|
|
Contained Zinc |
M lbs |
319.2 |
|
|
24.1 |
23.5 |
24.0 |
24.1 |
23.2 |
22.5 |
24.5 |
26.0 |
25.9 |
24.7 |
24.9 |
18.0 |
16.4 |
9.9 |
5.6 |
1.7 |
0.2 |
|
|
Contained Gold Equivalent |
K oz |
3,423 |
|
|
248 |
236 |
264 |
247 |
275 |
277 |
274 |
284 |
259 |
264 |
230 |
184 |
164 |
116 |
72 |
28 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recovered Gold |
K oz |
2,796 |
|
|
204 |
190 |
216 |
202 |
226 |
229 |
226 |
231 |
210 |
213 |
185 |
150 |
133 |
95 |
60 |
23 |
2 |
|
|
Recovered Silver |
K oz |
10,231 |
|
|
823 |
798 |
865 |
849 |
828 |
763 |
862 |
849 |
811 |
813 |
625 |
424 |
412 |
305 |
152 |
48 |
6 |
|
|
Recovered Zinc |
M lbs |
127.5 |
|
|
8.0 |
6.4 |
7.2 |
8.0 |
7.5 |
7.0 |
8.2 |
10.9 |
9.7 |
10.6 |
14.5 |
10.3 |
8.9 |
5.8 |
3.8 |
0.8 |
0.1 |
|
|
Recovered Gold Equivalent |
K oz |
2,969 |
|
|
217 |
202 |
229 |
216 |
239 |
240 |
240 |
245 |
224 |
227 |
198 |
159 |
141 |
101 |
63 |
24 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payable Gold |
K oz |
2,478 |
|
|
181 |
167 |
191 |
180 |
201 |
202 |
201 |
205 |
186 |
189 |
164 |
133 |
118 |
85 |
53 |
21 |
1 |
|
|
Payable Silver |
K oz |
8,404 |
|
|
676 |
653 |
711 |
698 |
681 |
627 |
709 |
697 |
664 |
667 |
513 |
349 |
338 |
252 |
125 |
39 |
5 |
|
|
Payable Zinc |
M lbs |
91.9 |
|
|
5.8 |
4.6 |
5.2 |
5.8 |
5.4 |
5.0 |
5.9 |
7.9 |
7.0 |
7.6 |
10.4 |
7.4 |
6.4 |
4.2 |
2.7 |
0.6 |
0.0 |
|
|
Payable Gold Equivalent |
K oz |
2,615 |
|
|
192 |
177 |
202 |
190 |
211 |
212 |
211 |
216 |
197 |
200 |
175 |
140 |
124 |
89 |
56 |
22 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash Cost* |
$ M |
2,645 |
- |
- |
176 |
180 |
205 |
204 |
204 |
208 |
209 |
207 |
187 |
193 |
163 |
142 |
130 |
94 |
76 |
47 |
20 |
|
|
Cash Cost |
$/oz Au |
1,067 |
- |
- |
970 |
1,076 |
1,072 |
1,137 |
1,016 |
1,026 |
1,041 |
1,013 |
1,001 |
1,020 |
989 |
1,072 |
1,107 |
1,114 |
1,437 |
2,263 |
14,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ M |
608 |
143 |
465 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sustaining Capital |
$ M |
489 |
- |
- |
46 |
40 |
41 |
41 |
37 |
29 |
33 |
46 |
46 |
32 |
27 |
20 |
18 |
13 |
11 |
7 |
2 |
|
|
Other Costs |
$ M |
153 |
- |
- |
11 |
10 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
12 |
12 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In Sustaining Costs* |
$ M |
3,317 |
- |
- |
233 |
230 |
258 |
256 |
254 |
249 |
254 |
266 |
244 |
236 |
200 |
171 |
155 |
113 |
90 |
55 |
23 |
30 |
|
All-In Sustaining Costs |
$/oz Au |
1,339 |
- |
- |
1,288 |
1,375 |
1,351 |
1,426 |
1,263 |
1,229 |
1,267 |
1,299 |
1,309 |
1,252 |
1,214 |
1,287 |
1,321 |
1,335 |
1,697 |
2,656 |
16,597 |
- |
*Costs includes by-product credits
Forward-looking Statements
This news release contains certain "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation and within the meaning of Section 27A of the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended, Section 21E of the United States Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, or in releases made by the
Non-GAAP Measures
The Company has included herein certain performance measures ("non-GAAP measures") which are not specified, defined, or determined under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). These non-GAAP measures are common performance measures in the gold mining industry, but because they do not have any mandated standardized definitions, they may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. Accordingly, we use such measures to provide additional information, and readers should not consider these non-GAAP measures in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. As the Project is not in production, it does not have historical non-GAAP financial measures nor historical comparable measures under IFRS, and therefore the foregoing prospective non-GAAP financial measures or ratios may not be reconciled to the nearest comparable measures under IFRS.
All-In Sustaining Cost
The Company has provided AISC performance measures that reflect all the expenditures that are required to produce an ounce of gold from operations. While there is no standardized meaning of the measure across the industry, the Company's definition conforms to the AISC definition as set out by the
Cash Costs
The Company calculated total cash costs as the sum of operating costs, royalty costs, production taxes, refining and shipping costs, net of by-product silver credits. Cash costs per ounce is calculated by taking total cash costs and dividing such amount by payable gold ounces. While there is no standardized meaning of the measure across the industry, the Company believes that this measure is useful to external users in assessing operating performance.
Sustaining Capital
Sustaining capital expenditure is a supplementary financial measure and defined as cash-basis expenditures which maintain operations and sustain production levels.
Cautionary Note to
This news release has been prepared in accordance with Canadian standards for the reporting of Mineral Resource and Mineral Reserve estimates, which differ in some material respects from the disclosure requirements of
Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. Due to the uncertainty of Measured Mineral Resources, Indicated Mineral Resources or Inferred Mineral Resources, these Mineral Resources may never be upgraded to Proven Mineral Reserves and Probable Mineral Reserves. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves or recovered. In addition,
|
____________________ |
|
1 See "Table 2: PEA Economic Sensitivity Analysis" for additional information. |
|
2 AISC is a non-GAAP measure. The Project does not currently have operations and therefore does not have historical equivalent measures to compare to and cannot perform a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial performance measure. See "Non-GAAP Measures" below. |
|
3 See the notes to table 2 below. |
|
4 Sustaining capital is a-GAAP measures. The Project does not currently have operations and therefore does not have historical equivalent measures to compare to and cannot perform a reconciliation of this non-GAAP financial performance measure. See "Non-GAAP Measures" below. |
SOURCE