Tom,
I can give you a rough idea of what's going on until you hear from C.L., and it gives me a chance to show I'm not always in question mode.
1. BD is scheduled to be on hand during weeks 3,4 and 7, I believe. That would mean they've been there, and will be back. Assuming we get to the 1100 lb. stage without a glitch, then BD will do their own independent duplication, at lab(s) of their choosing.
2. I won't address the first part, other than to say I don't worry about that. When BD duplicates the recovery process, they will sign off on the values they recover, and there won't be any question of chain of custody, etc. I believe that report could be expected as early as late Feb.
3. At the time IPM made their breakthrough, they were working on several projects at once... and the one BD was involved with was the fire assay. The recovery process represented a major step, so major that the fire assay was completely abandoned, as it's no longer necessary. I suppose we could have gotten a verification of this work from BD, but we would still have to do what we are doing now, and that is scaling it up. If IPM can duplicate what they were doing in the laboratory, using very small samples, into 500kg. samples, then we've got the makings of a mine. I don't think it's standard practice for BD to sign off on each step of the scaling up process. They will audit the results, sign off on the values, and then they will do what they do best, and that is, provide a feasibility study, help design the mine, etc.
4. Preliminary work has always suggested that there is more pt. than au., and I would suspect the company wants to be very sure of the numbers before releasing them. This could involve verification by a number of sources, and is probably being done. I think we will continue to see the gold and platinum being handled seperately for a while, as it has been recently. A sign off by BD on the au. alone will be major.
I hope this helps a little. I'm sure CL and others will be able to say more.
Best,
Kim |
