Auditoria Informe Barry Smee2009

A Review of the Arcata, Ares
and Selene Mine Laboratories

Peru
Prepared for:
Hochschild Mining plc

Lima, Peru
Prepared by:
Smee and Associates Consulting Ltd.
North Vancouver, Canada
January, 2009
A Review of Three Mine Laboratories
Hochschild Mining, plc
Peru, January, 2009
Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................. 1
2. Brief Regulatory Overview......................................................................... 2
3. Quality Control Overview .......................................................................... 4
3.1 Quality Control Procedures................................................................... 5
4. Results of Laboratory Audits.................................................................... 11
4.1 Arcata Mine Laboratory ...................................................................... 12
4.1.1 Arcata Laboratory Recommendations .......................................... 16
4.2 Ares Mine Laboratory ......................................................................... 17
4.2.1 Ares Recommendations ................................................................ 22
4.3 Selene Mine Laboratory ...................................................................... 22
4.3.1 Selene Recommendations ............................................................. 26
5. Final Comments........................................................................................ 27
References..................................................................................................... 28
Certificate of Qualifications.......................................................................... 29
Appendix 1.................................................................................................... 30
Laboratory Audit Guideline and Best Practices........................................ 30
Appendix 2.................................................................................................... 55
Arcata Laboratory Audit Form.................................................................. 55
Appendix 3.................................................................................................... 66
Ares Mine Laboratory Audit Form ........................................................... 66
Appendix 4.................................................................................................... 77
Selene Laboratory Audit Form.................................................................. 77
____________________________________________________ 1
Peru, January, 2009
1. Introduction
Hochschild Mining PLC is a publicly traded resource company listed in London, with
three operating mines located in Peru. Each mine is assisted by an on-site analytical
laboratory assigned the task of producing accurate and precise analyses of gold grades for
mine control and planning and measurements to assist the gold recovery plants in their
daily operations. These analyses should allow the mines to efficiently determine the
limits of “ore” and “waste” for daily production decisions, and determine the resources
available for inclusion in annual audit statements.
The Canadian Securities Exchanges, and the SEC in the U.S. have a strict set of rules and
definitions (some not mutually compatible) that govern the reporting of resources. The
London Exchange has incorporated many of the rules and definitions for mining assets
set by the Canadian, Australian and South African geological professions. The Canadian
resource reporting comes under the rules established after the Bre-X fiasco in 1997, and
is known as NI 43-101. The SEC rules for reporting by public companies are established
by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Australian rules are defined in the JORC code,
and the South African rules are contained in the SAMREC code. These legislations are
meant to protect the investing public, and are accompanied by severe censures for senior
employees or qualified persons (QP’s) who do not follow the rules.
Hochschild is establishing and ensuring the use of Best Practices in their mine
laboratories for all of their operations as part of their internal compliance programs. The
generation of the highest quality analyses will also permit the best decisions as to mine
operations on a daily basis. Even the reduction of a 10 % error in determining ore from
waste will produce considerable added value to each mining unit.
Smee and Associates Consulting Ltd. audited the mine laboratories in August 2007
(Smee B.W., 2007) and made a serious of recommendations to Hochschild to improve the
laboratories and to bring them into compliance with mining industry Best Practices. This
____________________________________________________ 1
Peru, January, 2009
second review was meant to examine the same three laboratories after they had made the
recommended changes to methods, operations and personnel.
I have included a Laboratory Guideline in Appendix 1. This Guideline summarizes the

Best Practices that are expected from every mineral exploration and assay laboratory. The
examination of Ares, Arcata and Selene laboratories took place from January 13 to 17
2009. The mine audits were conducted by this author, with the assistance of Mr. Walter
Montoya. I thank all the employees in the mine laboratories who showed exemplary
cooperation and answered all questions in a professional manner.
2. Brief Regulatory Overview
The TSX and London Exchanges, and the SEC in the U.S.A. require that all publicly
traded resource companies abide by the rules established by NI 43-101 or Sarbanes Oxley
(SOX) in reporting resources. It is useful to review some of the sections of NI 43-101 and
the CIMM Best Practices Guidelines and SOX as they apply to the Hochschild Mines. NI
43-101 devotes several sections specifically to the competency of the laboratories used in
determining resource calculations. The QP that is responsible for the NI 43-101 technical
report (part of the annual resource audit) must:
• Provide a summary description of the type of analytical or testing procedures
utilized, sample size, the name and location of each analytical or testing
laboratory used, the certification of each laboratory and any relationship of the
laboratory to the issuer.
• Provide details regarding sample preparation, assaying and analytical procedures
used… and whether the laboratories are certified by a standards association and
the particulars of any certification.
The CIMM Best Practice Guidelines also states that the QP is responsible for ensuring
that the laboratories are using industry accepted practices in assaying. These Guidelines
also state:
____________________________________________________ 2
Peru, January, 2009
“The selection of sample preparation procedures should be
approved by the QP. All samples that are reduced or split should
be processed in a manner such that the fraction analyzed or tested
is as representative as possible of the whole sample. Representative
fractions of the material to be analyzed or tested should be retained
for an appropriate period of time, as decided by the QP.”
The sampling of geological material must also include a comprehensive quality control
program. Some of the relevant sections of NI 43-101 state:
• Section 3.3 (1, c): a report must include “a statement as to the Quality Control
measures applied during the execution of the work”.
• Section 3.2 (b): “whether a qualified person (QP) has corroborated the data,
including sampling, analytical and test data underlying the information or
opinions…”
• Form 43-101 F1, Item 14: the report must state the “sample preparation methods
and quality control procedures employed prior to dispatch to an analytical or
testing laboratory”.
• “A summary of the nature and extent of all QC procedures employed and check
assay and other check analytical and testing procedures utilized, including the
results and corrective actions taken”.
• A statement of the “author’s (QP) opinion on the adequacy of sampling, sample
preparation, security and analytical procedures”.
Form 43-101 F1, Item 15 specifically details the data corroboration requirements
including: “the QC steps and data corroboration procedures which have been taken,
whether the author has corroborated the data the nature of and limitations on such
corroboration, the reasons for any failure to corroborate the data”.
Although many exploration programs are aware of these rules, few, if any, of the mining
operations comply. This latter deficiency is common to most companies.
____________________________________________________ 3
Peru, January, 2009
The SOX Act clearly indicates that it is not enough to merely sign off on the “what” of a
company’s financials. A company’s senior management must also certify the “how” i.e.
the company has effective internal controls that attest to the transparency and
accountability of the numbers and discussions of the future of the company. Most large
resources companies must give an annual accounting of their proven and probable
reserves. These estimates must be based upon industry accepted methods, and based upon
information known to be true. All resource estimates originate from laboratory analyses,
therefore certain knowledge of the acceptability of the analyses must be proven.
It is obvious that the two sets of rules come down to a very personal level. The
management of a company and the signing QP are held responsible for the performance
and the accuracy of reporting to the investing public. Errors can be devastating to the
management, and to the company. Although few large mineral companies have had to re-
state reserves, the petroleum sector has had to re-state, with serious consequences to the
particular companies.
3. Quality Control Overview

It is informative to review quality control methods that should be employed in the
sampling and analytical processes of mine exploration and mine grade control. The use of
quality control samples will quantify sampling and analytical error, and will indicate
where in the entire analytical process improvements are required to reduce risk and
increase the accuracy of grade control decisions. I noticed in the mine laboratory review
that many of the requests being made by the geological groups were founded on faulty
reasoning, and produced little to no useful information regarding the performance of the
laboratory or the geology.
Full-scale quality control (QC) procedures to monitor the sampling and analysis of
geological materials have only routinely been used in mineral exploration since 1997 or
so, although this author has been publishing methods to be used in QC programs for more
than 14 years (Smee, 1993, 1997a and b, 1998, 2000). A full QC program is now a
____________________________________________________ 4
Peru, January, 2009
mandatory component of “Best Practices” for mineral exploration in Canada, Australia
and South Africa and is dictated in Canada by National Instrument 43-101.
With a bit of forethought, planning and money, a well-designed QC program can detect
contamination, salting, sampling inconsistencies, sampling over-selection, laboratory
biases, analytical procedural errors, sample mis-numbering or mis-ordering, degraded
analytical detection limits and changes in mineralogy. Most importantly, a QC program
can quantify both the accuracy and precision of the entire sampling and analytical
process. Knowledge of these two quantities provides an estimate of the potential risk
associated with calculating an average grade of a drilled mineral deposit.
3.1 Quality Control Procedures

The QC in early stages of exploration is primarily focussed on monitoring precision and
contamination. Accuracy is of lesser importance. One of the main reasons for this is that
less expensive geochemical analytical methods are usually employed. Many laboratories
use weaker acid digestions such as aqua regia, and each lab has their own idiosyncrasies
as to dissolution temperature, time, and weight of sample used, thus resulting in data that
is biased with respect to other laboratories. Therefore, the main concern early stage
exploration geochemistry is the reproducibility of results and the repetition of patterns
(precision), as well as the detection of possible contamination.
Early exploration should therefore include the preparation of blank (barren) samples to
monitor contamination and a routine for inclusion of duplicate samples within a sample
string to monitor precision. A “standard” sample can be inserted for piece of mind,
however because of inconsistencies with the partial extractions, the main purpose for this
standard is to detect analytical biases or drift between sample batches.
Field blanks to monitor contamination during sampling, sample preparation and analysis
should be collected for each sample type. For instance, a soil blank can be collected from
a property early in the exploration program then used for the life of the program and a
barren blast hole can be used routinely in a mine. The blank sample must be inserted into
the sample stream from the field in such a way as to be invisible to the laboratory. If the
____________________________________________________ 5
Peru, January, 2009
blank sample yields a significantly increased concentration of the element being sought,
contamination of the sample batch has likely occurred, or the sample sequence has been
mixed either in the field or in the lab.
Field duplicate samples are splits of drill core, reverse-circulation cuttings, blasthole
cuttings, or outcrop samples from the same sampling interval. Reverse-circulation (RC)
drill duplicates must be obtained directly from the drill sample discharge as drilling is
progressing, while blast hole duplicates must be collected from the same blasthole
cuttings pile in an identical manner. Duplicates of three-dimensional samples, such as
channel samples cannot be duplicated exactly, but will still provide an estimate of the
overall sampling and analytical precision for the commodities of interest.
The frequency of field duplicates depends somewhat on the size of the laboratory
batches. One duplicate per laboratory batch should be used. For gold exploration, at least
one duplicate sample for every 20-40 samples should be inserted into the sample stream.
Most laboratories treat base metal analyses in batches of 40 samples, which is the size of
a rack of test tubes, and most gold assay laboratories use analytical batches of between 20
and 40 samples.
Field duplicate samples must also be blind to the laboratory and treated as normal
samples. It is important that the duplicates are taken randomly with no regard to rock
type, geographical position, degree of mineralization, or alteration. Any bias in the
duplicate sampling program will negate the validity of precision and detection limit
calculations.
Field duplicates contain the cumulative uncertainties associated with the entire sampling
and analytical process. The field duplicate should ideally be the same mass as the normal
samples. For drill core that means that the field duplicate will be both halves of drill core.
If this is done, the two halves of core can be compared to prove that sample overselection
did not take place during the sampling program, i.e. samplers have not preferentially
selected visible mineralization for assay. Blasthole cutting duplicates will include the
____________________________________________________ 6
Peru, January, 2009
sampling uncertainty at the blast hole, the sample preparation and the analysis. An
estimate of this uncertainty is critical to understanding the decision points of determining
ore and waste.
In addition, the laboratory should periodically split the coarse, jaw-crushed samples
(rock) into two preparation duplicates, which are then pulverized and analyzed
separately. The preparation duplicate will include the uncertainty in splitting the coarse
crushed sample to a smaller mass that can be pulverized. Most laboratories analyze and
report a pulp duplicate routinely. This pulp duplicate contains the uncertainty of sub-
sampling the pulp and of analysis. By compiling the field, preparation, and pulp duplicate
types, the geologist can ensure that the overall precision as well as the source of the
greatest uncertainty in the sampling and analytical process is quantified using the
statistical procedures of Thompson and Howarth, (1978).
Resource Delineation drill programs and mine control sampling are concerned not only
with contamination and precision but must determine the accuracy of the sampling and
analytical procedures. These advanced phases of geological sampling always use a “total”
assay method of analysis, which permits the use of standards to quantify accuracy.
Accuracy can only be determined by using these standard samples that have been
subjected to a comprehensive multi-lab Round Robin consensus testing to determine the
accepted mean and error on the mean.
There are different types of standards used during the processing of geological material.
Laboratories use artificial aqueous standards to calibrate instruments. Some use artificial
solid standards, though most manufacture standards from different geological media.
Although those procedures are necessary for the laboratory to monitor itself, the use of
these standards does not aid the exploration or mining company whatsoever. If a
company does not submit its own set of standards with its samples, no quantitative
estimate of accuracy can be given to the analysis of samples submitted during an
advanced exploration program.
____________________________________________________ 7
Peru, January, 2009
The best geological standards for resource delineation and mine control are property-
specific, meaning they contain the same geological matrix as the samples being routinely
analyzed. Standards are prepared by collecting material representative of the mineral
occurrence being explored or mined. Usually, this material is collected from coarse reject
following preliminary drilling or sampling, or from blasthole samples. Composites
weighing between 200 and 300 kg are most commonly made. A common procedure is to
prepare three standards for the important economic benchmark grades: one for each of
the resource’s expected cut-off grade, average grade, and higher grade expected to be
mined.
These composites should be forwarded to a laboratory specializing in the preparation of

standards. Each composite must be crushed, pulverized, and screened through at least 200
mesh. The finely pulverized pulp is placed in a large mixer for at least a day and as much
as a week. Once homogenization tests are performed, at least 60 portions of the pulp are
sent for “round robin” analysis to various laboratories. Results from these analyses are
compiled and treated statistically to determine the “accepted value” and error limits on
that value. This process sometimes must be repeated, as laboratories may report
unacceptably poor precision, or have significant bias in comparison to other laboratories.
Standards must be packaged either in 1 kg, vacuum-packed and heat-sealed plastic or

aluminium foil bags or in individual paper pulp bags that are heat-sealed in plastic, then
forwarded to the exploration or mining company. Quantities prepared are normally
sufficient to last the duration of an exploration program, or for a single pit and may well
be used to “tune up” a mine laboratory. The use of the same standards will ensure that
any changes in the laboratory are closely monitored, and that the analyses from a future
laboratory will be similar to historical data. As with blanks and duplicates, at least one
standard per analytical batch (20 to 40 samples) should be inserted in a sample stream to
monitor accuracy.
Many companies routinely submit a sub-sample of pulp or reject to a second laboratory,

with the intent of confirming the “accuracy” of analyses. This second analysis does not,
____________________________________________________ 8
Peru, January, 2009
of course, measure accuracy, but it does establish the reproducibility of analysis and the
presence or absence of bias between the laboratories. A well designed QC program that
uses standards to establish the accuracy of all analytical batches does not require a set of
confirmatory analyses, however this has been an industry practise and is still required by
many mining engineering firms.
It is important that each exploration or mining office assigns the responsibility of quality
control to a geological technician or geologist who compiles and monitors data
immediately upon receipt of results from the laboratory. Suspect analytical data must be
identified immediately, before it is entered into a master database. Each major drilling
project or mine control program should have a dedicated quality control technician or
geologist on-site to monitor all aspects of sample collection, QC sample positioning,
database design and updates, sample preparation, laboratory or field failures, data
acceptance, and master database updates. This in-house technician or geologist must
report to an independent specialist, who can anticipate problems, draw on experience, and
independently audit the data.
All on-going quality control data can be

Standard 1 Gold
Round Robin and Drill Holes
summarized into three simple charts: a
1.00
L3
time series chart for each standard; a time
0.90 Round Robin
L3 L3 DataL3 Drill Data
L1L1
L1
L1
L1
L2 L3 L3 L3L3
L3 Mean + series chart for each blank, and an X-Y
Assay Grade (Au gr/T)
L1L1
L1L1 P-27
P-27P-28
0.80 L1 L4L4
L4L4
L4 L4 P-27
L1 L1 P-24 P-26
L1 L1L1
L1 L1
L1 L3 L3L3 P-26 P-27 P-29
L1 L1 L1 L1 L1 L2 P-24P-25P-26 P-29 P-31
L1 L2 L3L3L3 L3 P-24 P-29
P-29 P-31 P-36
L2 L2 P-27
P-28 P-31
P-32
P-32
P-32
P-32
P-33
P-34
P-34
0.70
L1
L2
L2L2
L2
L2
L2 L2
L2
L2
L2
L2L2
L2
L3 L3
L3
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4L4L4
L4L4
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4
L4L4
P-25
P-24
P-25
P-25P-26
P-26
P-25
P-28P-30
P-28
P-30
P-30
P-30
P-32
P-31
P-31P-33P-34
P-35
P-35
P-35
P-36
P-37
P-38
P-35P-38
Mean
scatter chart for all duplicates. Additional
L2 L2
L2
L2
L2 L3 L3
0.60
L3L3
L3
Mean - 2SD
graphics can be done at a later time, but
L3
0.50
L2
are used for final presentations or
0.40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
precision calculations rather than real
Number of Samples
time assessment of data.
Standard charts should begin with the initial round robin results so that the entire history
of the standard can be seen at all times. An example of such a chart is shown here.
____________________________________________________ 9
Peru, January, 2009
Similarly, blanks and duplicates (field, preparation and pulp) should be plotted as each
analytical work order is received.
A “Table of Logic” must be developed for each project that clearly outlines the rules for
“passing or failing” for all QC samples. All failures must be listed in a “Table of
Failures” so that each failure is listed and the corrective action taken is identified. A
typical Table of Logic for a gold project is shown below:
Table of Logic
Rule 1 Standards for Au beyond the mean ± 3 SD limits are failures (accuracy).
Rule 2 Two adjacent standards for Au that are more than 2 SD on the same side of the mean
are both failures (bias). These may not be the same standard.
Rule 3 Field blanks that are more than the Warning Limit for Au are failures.
An integral part of all Quality Control programs is the design and security of the
database. Multiple copies of a working database can be made but only one copy of the
master database should exist, and be under the control of one person. Changes to the
master database must be authorised by the senior project geologist or Project Manager.
No analytical data should be placed into the master database until the data has
successfully cleared quality control examination. Additionally, no analytical data
received in electronic format should be placed into the database until the Work Order is
marked by the laboratory as being final. Preliminary or partial analyses should never be
placed into the master database. In fact, the laboratories should be instructed not to send
“Preliminary” data at all.
Senior management must support quality control in mineral exploration. A series of

corporate guidelines must be instituted for each stage of exploration or mine control and
adhered to. This process costs money and time, and the temptation to cut corners is great,
especially if the budget is tight and the will is weak.
A mineral resource or mine control database that does not include comprehensive quality
control to prove sampling and analytical accuracy, and defines the precision
____________________________________________________ 10
Peru, January, 2009
characteristics of the mineralization is essentially worthless. The data will not pass an
internal or external audit according to NI 43-101, JORC, or SAMREC guidelines.
4. Results of Laboratory Audits
All three laboratories were visited during normal business hours and with prior warning
to the laboratories. The audit began with an explanation of the purpose of the audit, the
format that would take place, a review of the audit form with each laboratory manager or
section head, and a number of questions regarding the overall laboratory staffing and the
sample throughput requirements. The audit then began at the sampling receiving area and
worked through in a logical sequence to the end of analytical process. Questions
regarding quality control procedures, internal pass-fail logic, and data base type were also
posed to the management. Each laboratory was given multi-element standards as a check
on the accuracy of analyses on that day.
The standards were manufactured by CDN Labs of Vancouver and certified by this
author from a multi-lab round robin.
The results from the standards are evaluated in several ways. The most obvious is to
determine how close the analysis is to the accepted mean. This does not take into account
the normal error inherent in the standard. The z score is a method of comparing accuracy
between labs that combines the accepted mean and the interlab (between lab) standard
deviation as calculated from the Round Robin analysis, with the reported analysis of the
standard. I should stress that the “between lab” standard deviation is not the same as the
“Confidence Interval” as shown on most certificates or printed on government issued
standard bottles. The “between lab” standard deviation usually has to be obtained from
the standard supplier and is sometimes called the “between laboratory” standard
deviation on the certificate. Some companies simply state a “standard deviation”.
The “z score” approach produces three categories of accuracy: satisfactory (z score <2),
questionable (z score >2 and <3), and unsatisfactory (z score >3). A perfect analysis
produces a z score of 0. A consistently positive or negative z score for a variety of
____________________________________________________ 11
Peru, January, 2009
elements within one standard, or for the same element in several standards may indicate
that the laboratory has a bias in their analytical methods. The results and z scores for each
participating lab is shown within the audit form and also is compiled in a following
section. Additionally, the z scores are given points: four points for scores less than ± 1.0,
three points for scores greater than ±1.0 and less than ± 1.5, two points for scores more
than ± 1.5 and less than ± 2.0, one point for scores between ± 2.0 and ± 3.0 and zero
points for scores more than ± 3.0. These points are totaled for each laboratory.
4.1 Arcata Mine Laboratory

The Arcata Mine laboratory is located on the upper level of the mine complex next to the
mill. The audit was guided by the laboratory manager, Mr. Alex Cajahuanea and assisted
greatly by Mr. Walter Montoya. The Audit Form is shown in Appendix 2.
The laboratory has undergone revision and refurbishing since the initial visit, but is
housed in the same building and has the same problem with samples being received in a
room farthest from the main entrance. Samples must therefore be carried from the
entrance door down the hallway to the sample preparation room. This is not an efficient
layout, but the laboratory is not easily re-arranged because of the lack of space at their
present location.
Samples are now accompanied by a sample submission sheet that can be checked against
the samples that have been sent by the clients. Samples are now logged into the computer
by hand, with Excel providing the only sample tracking. The lab writes all sample labels
by hand, and fills in the worksheets by hand. The installation of a LIMS data base would
be much more efficient and error-free. A data base and LIMS designed specifically for
mines such as the Hochschild installations can be seen at www.centurysystems.net.
Quality control samples are now systematically inserted into the sample stream, which is
a big improvement from the last visit. Dryers have been installed in the lab that have the
capacity to handle all samples on trolleys and are temperature controlled. Geological
samples are placed in paper-lined steel trays for drying.
____________________________________________________ 12
Peru, January, 2009
The drying temperature has been adjusted to 95 C for geological samples and is at 130 C
for plant samples. This again is an improvement since the last audit.
The two crushers were being operated to the correct size and were clean and the dust
control was satisfactory. The operators must air blast clean the crushers between each
sample taking care to clean the corners of the TM equipment. The specifications of the
final crush size of 85 % -2mm were being monitored with a QC program and the data
was compiled and plotted in an Excel chart. This is a huge improvement from the
previous audit.
The pulverizers used for geological and heads and tails are Labtechessa LM-2’s, with
good dust control at all stations. The small bowls are in good condition. All bowls are
cleaned with silica sand between each sample. Once a pulp is produced, it is placed into a
paper pulp bag. It would be better to use larger bowls for the pulverizer as a larger pulp is
more representative of the original sample however this may not be a problem with the
Arcata mineralization. An examination of the pulp and preparation duplicate data would
determine if larger bowls are required to produce better precision.
The air compressors that supplies the lab with air for cleaning equipment now has air and
water filters and is purged of water every day. This should be checked occasionally by
the lab manager.
The preparation laboratory includes a preparation duplicate and a preparation blank with
each sample batch. This is again a significant improvement over the previous visit.
Samples for fire assay are weighed on a 4 place balance into plastic bags in batches of
maximum 48 samples, but batch size is variable depending on the samples delivered.
This is not efficient, and should be organized with the various clients of the laboratory to
receive samples at a fixed time during the shifts so that they can be processed in fixed-
____________________________________________________ 13
Peru, January, 2009
sized batches. The balances are now calibrated daily with external weights and the
weights recorded in a book.
The lab now has a flux formula in the fire assay that includes a sufficient amount of
litharge for the samples being assayed. The flux is being obtained from Anachemia and
the litharge is of superior grade. The fusion and cupellation furnaces are clean and appear
to be operated at the correct temperatures. The fusion time could be increased to an hour
from 45 to 50 minutes now being used. The time for cupellation should be increased to
45 minutes minimum.
The wet lab digestion techniques have not been changed since the last visit and appear to
be operating in a satisfactory manner. The hot plates are now monitored with an IR gun
to ensure the temperatures are to specifications. A further standardization of hot plate
temperatures could be done by the use of a sand bath on the top of the plate to ensure an
even temperature across the plate.
The measuring devices such as the auto-pipettes are now calibrated by weight of liquid
dispensed but only water is used for the measurements. Ideally the measurements should
be made with the acid being dispensed, as the different acids have different viscosities.
This should be done by knowing the density of the liquids being dispensed, dispensing
the measured volume of liquid, and weighing the liquid. The actual volume is then
calculated using the density and weight. This should be done each day.
The lab uses a single AAS for all measurements. All calibration solutions are now made
weekly and signed and dated. All absorbances from the new solutions should be
compared against the old solutions and these recorded in a book. All elements now have
a four point curve for determining the absorbance curve. The lab should also invest in an
electronic auto-dilutor for the higher grade samples.
The quality control practices in the laboratory have been upgraded substantially. The lab
now has a full time QC Manager, standards and a full set of rules to monitor quality. The
____________________________________________________ 14
Peru, January, 2009
lab still needs to certify their internal standards for the base metals. This should be done
with a new round robin that includes the Lima-based laboratories. All QC charts were
current and correct. However, the use of duplicates I mis-understood by the laboratory
management and most of all the clients. I suggest that the mine geologists and engineers
attend a one day seminar in the future to discuss laboratory methods and QC practices.
The laboratory must still compile data for the various clients manually and forward to the
different clients in their format. The mine should invest in a central data base and LIMS
to bring all participants to a common format, and efficiency.
The results of the four standards submitted to the laboratory are shown in Appendix 2 and
are repeated below:
Sample
Number Standard Accepted Au, g/t Assayed Au, g/t z score Points
ART-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.34 -0.50 4
ART-2 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.32 -0.83 4
ART-3 SE-2 0.242 ± 0.018 0.24 -0.22 4
ART-4 SE-1 0.480 ± 0.034 0.48 0.0 4
Total Points 16/16

Sample
Number Standard Accepted Ag, g/t Assayed Ag, g/t z score Points
ART-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 74.48 +0.16 4
ART-2 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 71.37 -0.69 4
ART-3 SE-2 354 ± 21.0 357.11 +0.30 4
ART-4 SE-1 712 ± 57 718.03 +0.21 4
Total Points 16/16

Sample
Number Standard Accepted Cu, % Assayed Cu, % z score Points
ART-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.73 -1.13 3
ART-2 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.73 -1.13 3
ART-3 SE-2 0.049 ± 0.003 0.048 -0.67 4
ART-4 SE-1 0.097 ± 0.005 0.096 -0.40 4
Total Points 14/16

Sample
Number Standard Accepted Zn, % Assayed Zn, % z score Points
ART-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.74 +0.02 4
ART-2 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.73 -0.17 4
ART-3 SE-2 1.43 ± 0.11 1.31 -2.18 1
ART-4 SE-1 2.65 ± 0.20 2.66 +0.10 4
Total Points 13/16
____________________________________________________ 15
Peru, January, 2009
Sample
Number Standard Accepted Pb, % Assayed Pb, % z score Points
ART-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.49 +0.58 4
ART-2 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.48 +0.05 4
ART-3 SE-2 0.957 ± 0.044 0.97 +0.59 4
ART-4 SE-1 1.92 ± 0.09 1.91 -0.22 4
Total Points 16/16
Total Points and Percentage: 75/80 or 93.8 %
Two of the standards submitted were the same to assess laboratory precision.
Commercial laboratories tested under similar conditions usually score between 12/16 to a
perfect 16/16 points for each test. The lab did extremely well in all elements. This is a big
improvement from the last examination. The lab is capable of producing both accurate
and precise results.
4.1.1 Arcata Laboratory Recommendations
The following recommendations are compiled from the body of the report:
• The Arcata laboratory has improved immensely since the first inspection and all
should be congratulated in their incorporation of industry Best Practises. The
internal standards are certified only for Au and Ag, and should include the base
metals Cu, Pb, Zn and Fe.
• The lab should still inquire about installing a small LIMS and overall data base
for all departments. One such set of software specifically designed for a mine and
mine laboratory is offered by Century Systems Inc. of Sudbury Ontario
(www.centurysystems.net). This LIMS can control the incoming sample flow,
generate bar codes for sample bags, produce a lab worksheet, eliminate paper
transcriptions, insert QC samples automatically and plot the data, and report to all
clients in a constant format.
• The sample preparation area is vastly improved. The enclosures around the
crushers could be closed with doors, and the pulverizers could possibly use the
larger B1000 bowls to produce a larger pulp.
____________________________________________________ 16
Peru, January, 2009
• The fire assay fusion and cupel furnaces could be run a bit longer for each fusion:
about an hour for the fusion and 50 minutes to an hour for cupellation.
• All hot plates could have a sand bath placed on top to ensure an even temperature
is applied to all samples.
• The auto-dispensers for acid should be calibrated daily using the actual acid being
dispensed. The data should be placed in a book.
• AAS calibration absorbances form new standards should be compared to the
absorbance from the old solutions before being used to ensure that the solutions
have been made correctly and that the instrument conditions have not changed.
All old vs new aborbances should be recorded in a book and signed by the
operator. The lab should also invest in an electronic auto-dilutor for the higher
grade samples.
• The mine management, geologists and the laboratory supervisors should attend a
seminar in order to better understand the methods and QC protocols that are
required for Best Practices.
4.2 Ares Mine Laboratory
The Ares mine laboratory is still located near the mill complex and is a large multi-level
cement and brick structure with the sample preparation in an upper level, separated from
the main laboratory. The audit was guided by the laboratory manager and greatly assisted
by Mr. Walter Montoya and Mr. Jose Dapello. The Audit Form is in Appendix 3.
Samples are delivered to the sample preparation room by the various clients and sorted on
tables or the cement floor. Clients now include a sample submission form with all
samples, but only one sample tag. A book is filled out by hand with the sample numbers,
and a sequential work order number is now used in the lab. The samples are hand-entered
into an Excel spreadsheet but labels for the bags are written manually. The QC positions
are inserted manually on each control sheet. The lab could benefit with a small LIMS.
Samples are placed into new steel drying pans that are washed between each use. The lab
was using a small electric dryer at the time of the visit but a modern forced air dryer was
____________________________________________________ 17
Peru, January, 2009
being installed. This will be a significant improvement. The drying temperature is set at
130 C which is high for geological samples. A temperature of 95 C would be best for the
geological samples, but could be increased for plant samples. One of the existing dryers
can be used for high grade samples.
The sample preparation room has been re-designed so that the sample flow is linear. The
lab now has two TM Terminator crushers: one primary and one secondary or fine
crusher. All are in dust control plenums and all in good condition. A small amount of
grease was noticed in one of the crusher catch trays. This should be examined each day
after lubrication is complete.
The lab now has a new riffle splitter with new pans and has a good dust control system. A
200 g split is taken from the crushed material, which is placed into one of two LM-2
pulverizers. The bowls are a bit small for this lab. I recommend the use of B1000 bowls
that will take about 500 g of sample. The pulverizers were in good condition.
The jaws and pulverizer bowls are cleaned with quartz or quartz sand: the crushers
cleaned about every 10 samples and the pulverizer bowls between each sample. A sample
of cleaning quartz is assayed about every 30 samples.
Quality control in the sample preparation room consists of a preparation duplicate once
every batch of 30 samples, and dry screening of the coarse crush and pulp every 10
samples. The percentage passing is shown in a book and plotted in charts using Excel.
The sample preparation room is a big improvement over the last visit, where almost all of
the recommendations made in the original report have been instituted. The lab
management should be congratulated.
The samples are weighed on a top loading but closed 4-place balance to 3 decimals.
There is no LIMS being used so all data is hand written. The balances are calibrated daily
with 0.5, 5, 50 and 200 g weights, and the data recorded in a book. The balances are
____________________________________________________ 18
Peru, January, 2009
certified every year. A 25 g sample is used for fire assaying heads, tails, metallurgical and
geological samples. Concentrate uses 5 g. The microbalance is in a sealed room and is
calibrated with 4 appropriate weights daily.
The fire assay floor comprises two rooms for fire assay, flux mixing and cupellation. One
room is in a re-construction phase and will be much better suited to the fire assay flow.
The present batch size is 30-35 samples. Sample batches from different clients are now
not mixed. The fusion and cupellation temperatures are now being run at industry
specifications and for the required length of time.
The flux formula has been modified and the litharge is obtained from Anachemia and is
industry standard. The addition of the amount of flux to each sample has been changed
and the lead button weights are now in industry specification. The normal slag color is
green, which indicates that the fusions are being done correctly. The ducting in the lab is
now being rebuilt. The lab requires a prill picking area with a good clean table and a
light.
The parting methods and acid mixtures have been changed and are now meeting industry
specifications. The wet lab has three hoods, one being used for gravimetric and one for
AAS digestions. The doors to the wet lab were open and the air flow was not balanced.
The door should be shut during lab operation. The fume hoods need the lights replaced,
and the hot plates should have a method of distribution the heat evenly to all tubes and
beakers. Usually this can be accomplished by a simple sand bath. All temperatures are
monitored with an IR gun and recorded daily.
The acid mixtures have been changed for base metal analyses, but Teflon beakers are still
required for the use of HF. These have been budgeted for use in 2009. Auto-diluters
should be used for the dilution of high grade sample. The acid dispensers should be
calibrated daily and with the acids being dispensed.
____________________________________________________ 19
Peru, January, 2009
The lab uses a Perkin Elmer AAS machine for base metal and gold assays, and an older
GBC machine for CN solution analyses. The GBC is serviced every 3 months and the PE
every 6 months. Data must be hand transferred from the instrument software to an Excel
file and then to the geological data base. This is completely inefficient and should be
streamlined by at least the use of an upgrade to the geological data base. This upgrade is
available at the Arcata mine. Ideally, the equipment should be hooked into a LIMS and a
central data base.
The AAS is calibrated using standards made weekly with all dates on the bottles. The
absorbances are recorded in a book and compared with the old standards before their use.
This is a significant improvement over the previous visit.
The lab now has three property specific standards certified and use two for each batch of
30 samples. These should also be certified for base metals with a new round robin set of
analyses. Presently the lab uses several CDN standards for base metals but these will
soon run out. One pulp duplicate, one preparation duplicate, one preparation blank and
one analytical blank is analyzed per 30 samples. This again is a big improvement.
The lab now has a full time QC Manager with all QC examination being done manually
in Excel. As previously mentioned, all data must be manually re-entered for geology.
This is a complete waste of time. The lab has an acceptable set of rules for passing and
failing QC samples, but the use of duplicates is not understood by the clients. The lab
does not do a precision calculation as the geologists do not use the duplicates for
precision estimates. The mine geologists should participate in a laboratory and QC
seminar to better understand the process of sampling and analyses.
The results from the four standards that were given to the Ares lab are shown in
Appendix 3 and are repeated below:
____________________________________________________ 20
Peru, January, 2009
Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.40 +0.50 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 1.71 ± 0.14 1.63 -1.14 3
ARS-3 SE-2 0.242 ± 0.018 0.240 -0.22 4
Total Points 11/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 73.64 -0.07 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 83.6 ± 6.6 89.47 +1.78 2
ARS-3 SE-2 354 ± 21.0 349.89 -0.42 4
Total Points 10/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.762 +0.26 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 0.94 ± 0.07 0.969 +0.83 4
ARS-3 SE-2 0.049 ± 0.003 0.049 0.0 4
Total Points 12/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.732 -0.13 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 1.93 ± 0.16 1.977 +0.59 4
ARS-3 SE-2 1.43 ± 0.11 1.287 -2.60 1
Total Points 9/12
Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.478 -0.05 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 0.51 ± 0.06 0.526 +0.53 4
ARS-3 SE-2 0.957 ± 0.044 0.947 -0.45 4
Total Points 12/12
Total Points and Percentage: 54/60 or 90 %
The Ares laboratory did a much better job on the standards than in the previous visit. The
major loss of points was with one sample for Zn and may have been caused by the
different acid solutions used a Ares than was used to certify the standards. The lab does
not appear to have any bias in their analyses.
____________________________________________________ 21
Peru, January, 2009
4.2.1 Ares Recommendations
The recommendations from the body of the report will be summarized below. The lab
should be congratulated in making so many significant changes to equipment, methods
and personnel.
• The lab should inquire about installing a small LIMS and overall data base for all
departments. One such set of software specifically designed for a mine and mine
laboratory is offered by Century Systems Inc. of Sudbury Ontario
(www.centurysystems.net).
• A temperature of 95 C would be best for the geological samples, but could be
increased for plant samples. One of the existing dryers can be used for high grade
samples.
• The lab requires a prill picking area with a good clean table and a light.
• The fume hoods need the lights replaced, and the hot plates should have a method
of distribution the heat evenly to all tubes and beakers. Usually this can be
accomplished by a simple sand bath.
• The acid dispensers should be calibrated daily and with the acids being dispensed.
• Data must be hand transferred from the instrument software to an Excel file and
then to the geological data base. This is completely inefficient and should be
streamlined by at least the use of an upgrade to the geological data base. This
upgrade is available at the Arcata mine.
• The mine geologists should participate in a laboratory and QC seminar to better
understand the process of sampling and analyses.
4.3 Selene Mine Laboratory

The Selene, also known as the Explorador mine laboratory is now operated by an in-
house manager. SGS, the previous operator has been replaced since the last visit. The
laboratory manager and the QC manager guided the audit, which was greatly assisted by
Mr. Walter Montoya and Mr. Jose Dapello. The Audit Form is shown in Appendix 4.
The laboratory has been re-designed and refurbished since the last visit and is greatly
improved. Samples are received in a clean room with sorting tables. Paperwork
____________________________________________________ 22
Peru, January, 2009
accompanies the samples and the numbers are checked against the paperwork. Errors are
rectified by the clients before samples are processed. The sample numbers are entered
into an Excel spreadsheet, as the LIMS was removed by SGS. QC sample positions are
placed in the worksheet. Labels are still done manually however.
Samples are placed on new stainless steel pans that are lined with paper between each
sample. The lab has two new Essa driers that take trolleys and a small dryer for plant
samples. The temperature for drying geology samples is near 125 C, which is a bit high.
The temperature for geological samples should not exceed 95 C. The dryers have dust
filters over the air intakes.
The lab now operates a Rhino as the primary crusher and a Terminator as a secondary
crusher. Both were in good condition and were free from grease. The dust collection
system was in operation and worked well. The lab now has a large riffle splitter with new
pans and is in good order. A dust control hood needs to be installed for the splitter.
Quartz cleaning material is used for the crushers every 10 samples and for the pulverizers
between every sample. As with the other labs, the LM-2 pulverizers could use the larger
B1000 bowls to make a 500 g pulp.
The quality control on the crusher and pulverizer includes a screen test of 3 samples per
batch of 48, and a preparation duplicate every batch. A quartz cleaning blank is assayed
every batch as well. The specification for the crusher is now 85 % -10 mesh, and the pulp
is 90 % -200 mesh. The lab uses a separate balance for the QC. This balance must be
placed on a level table and be calibrated as are the other balances. The data is placed in a
book, and plotted in Excel. The charts are displayed on the wall of the lab.
The fire assay balance weighs 30 g to 2 decimals for the geology, heads and tails samples
and 7 g for the concentrate. The weighing room is sealed and the balances calibrated
twice per day with three weights. The base metal balance is also calibrated twice per day
with four weights. The data is placed in a book. All balances are certified once per year
____________________________________________________ 23
Peru, January, 2009
and have a maintenance check twice per year. This again is a big improvement since the
last visit.
The fire assay room contains the flux addition, and furnace equipment. The flux formula
is now satisfactory and the source of the litharge is from Anachemia. The button weights
are also satisfactory. The furnaces are operated at the required temperatures for the
required amount of time. The sample templates have been adjusted to the required sample
batch size to avoid sample mis-ordering errors.
The lab now uses an industry accepted practice for pouring the slag and lead into the iron
moulds. This is a big improvement over the SGS method. Assay crucibles are used only
one time to avoid cross contamination. However, the prills should be picked in the fire
assay lab and not another part of the laboratory. This will keep the Pb-rich cupels in the
fire assay lab and avoid possible safety hazards and contamination.
The wet laboratory contains three fume hoods with one being used for parting and one for
acid digestions. One is used for acid storage. Parting is done with 15 % HNO3 at 130 C
for 30 minutes, while aqua regia digestion for base metals is done at 250 C. three drops of
HF are now used in the base metal analytical process, but the lab does not have any
Teflon containers. The temperature on the hot plates is now monitored with an IR gun
and the data recorded. As with the other labs, a sand bath could be used to distribute heat
evenly to all containers. Care should be taken to ensure that the digital temperature
controllers are accurately showing the temperatures of the hot plates.
The lab now uses deionized water that is monitored for conductivity. The data is recorded
in a book. The auto-dispensers are calibrated in the lab but must be done each day using
the actual acids that are being dispensed.
The laboratory uses a single AAS for all base metal assays and the Au and Ag are
finished by gravimetric methods. The calibration standards are now made each week and
the absorbances are recorded in a book. However the lab manager must check that the
____________________________________________________ 24
Peru, January, 2009
absorbances are actually within the required limits. The present book should be adjusted
to show when new standards are being introduced.
The lab now inserts two certified standards for each batch of 48 samples. A single CDN
standard per batch of 30 is inserted for base metals. The Selene internal standards should
be certified for base metals as well as for Au and Ag. The lab also inserts a preparation
duplicate, a pulp duplicate and two forms of blanks per batch of 48 samples or a QC
frequency of 23 %. This is above the average for commercial laboratories.
The lab has a full time QC manager to review data. However, the night shift supervisor
must allow the data to be examined by the QC manager before sending to the client in the
morning. The lab monitors accuracy, bias and contamination with each batch and have
acceptable rules for passing and failing the QC samples. However the duplicates are
monitored for compliance within 20 % of each other. This should be changed to record
the actual differences and the data used for a precision calculation. QC charts are done
monthly and will be done on a continuous long term basis as well.
It appears that the SGS Selene laboratory has no useful quality control practises in place.
The standard is not certified, the preparation blanks are done only once a month, but the
data could not be found, and the duplicates are not actually assayed.
The results from the standards are shown in Appendix 4 and are repeated below:
Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.42 +0.83 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 1.71 ± 0.14 1.72 +0.14 4
SEL-3 SE-1 0.480 ± 0.034 0.48 0.0 4
Total Points 12/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 73.37 -0.15 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 83.6 ± 6.6 85.85 +0.68 4
SEL-3 SE-1 712 ± 57 710.67 -0.05 4
Total Points 12/12
____________________________________________________ 25
Peru, January, 2009
Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.74 -0.69 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 0.94 ± 0.07 0.95 +0.29 4
SEL-3 SE-1 0.097 ± 0.005 0.10 +1.20 3
Total Points 11/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.72 -0.37 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 1.93 ± 0.16 1.84 -1.13 3
SEL-3 SE-1 2.65 ± 0.20 2.58 -0.70 4
Total Points 11/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.49 +0.58 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 0.51 ± 0.06 0.53 +0.67 4
SEL-3 SE-1 1.92 ± 0.09 1.89 -0.67 4
Total Points 12/12
Selene scored almost a perfect result one the three standards. They are doing extremely
well. The Zn may have a small negative bias.
4.3.1 Selene Recommendations

The recommendations listed below have been compiled from the body of the report. The
lab has performed a remarkable turn-around and the management must be congratulated
on instilling the industry Best Practise guidelines as recommended in the initial report.
• The temperature for drying geology samples is near 125 C, which is a bit high.
The temperature for geological samples should not exceed 95 C.
• A dust control hood needs to be installed for the splitter.
• As with the other labs, the LM-2 pulverizers could use the larger B1000 bowls to
make a 500 g pulp.
• The sample preparation balance must be placed on a level table and be calibrated
as are the other balances.
• The prills should be picked in the fire assay lab and not another part of the
laboratory. This will keep the Pb-rich cupels in the fire assay lab and avoid
possible safety hazards and contamination.
____________________________________________________ 26
Peru, January, 2009
• As with the other labs, a sand bath could be used to distribute heat evenly to all
containers. Care should be taken to ensure that the digital temperature controllers
are accurately showing the temperatures of the hot plates.
• The auto-dispensers are calibrated in the lab but must be done each day using the
actual acids that are being dispensed.
• The lab manager must check that the standard absorbances are actually within the
required limits. The present book should be adjusted to show when new standards
are being introduced.
• The night shift supervisor must allow the data to be examined by the QC manager
before sending to the client in the morning.
5. Final Comments
The laboratories have worked hard to rectify deficiencies seen in the initial examination
and all three of the Peruvian laboratories are being operated to industry best practises. All
labs did very well on the standards given to them, for all elements. All labs would still
benefit from the introduction of a LIMS and central data base. A seminar for all mine
geological staff is recommended to introduce the concepts of laboratory analyses and
quality control, especially the use of duplicate samples to monitor and estimate
geological precision.
Respectfully Submitted by:
Barry W. Smee, Ph.D., P.Geo.
____________________________________________________ 27
Peru, January, 2009
References
Smee, B.W., 1993: Sampling and Analysis. B.C. and Yukon Chamber of Mines,
Exploration and Mining for Brokers and Investors.
Smee, B.W., 1997a: Quality Control, Part 1. Northern Miner, June 16, v. 83, No.16
Smee, B.W., 1997b: Quality Control, Part 2. Northern Miner, June 23. v. 83, No. 17.
Smee, B.W., 1998: Overview of quality control procedures required by mineral

exploration companies. In: Workshop on quality control methods in mineral
exploration. Association of Exploration Geochemists, Vancouver. B.W. Smee ed.
Smee, B.W., 1998: Reply to TSE/OSC Mining Standards Task Force, In: Setting New
Standards, Companion Volume B.
Smee, B.W., 1999: How to audit a commercial laboratory. In: Workshop on Quality
Control in Mineral Exploration, 19th IGES, Vancouver.
Smee, B.W., 2000: Quality control in mineral exploration. In: Mineria, Centro de
Excelencia en Mineria (Centre of Excellence in Mining). Publ. by Arthur
Andersen, Santiago Chile.
Smee, B.W., 2005a: Interim recommendations for quality control procedures, Angostura
Project, Colombia. Greystar internal report. 24p.
Smee, B.W. and Stanley, C. R., 2005: Sample preparation of ‘nuggety’ samples:
dispelling some myths about sample size and sampling errors. Explore, v.126, p.
21-26.
Stanley C.R. and Smee, B.W., 2005: Reply to Dr. Dominique Franceois-Bongarceon re:
Sample preparation of ‘nuggety’ samples: dispelling some myths about sample
size and sampling errors. Explore number 127, p. 19-23.
Smee, B.W., 2007: A review of Ares, Arcata and Selene Laboratories. Hochschild
internal report. 100 p.
Thompson, M. and Howarth, R.J., 1978: A new approach to the estimation of analytical
precision. J. Geochem. Explor., 9: 23-30.
____________________________________________________ 28
Peru, January, 2009
Certificate of Qualifications
1. I, Barry W. Smee a geologist and geochemist, reside at 4658 Capilano Road North
Vancouver B.C., V7R 4K3.
2. I am a member in good standing of the Association of Professional Engineers and
Geoscientists of British Colombia and a full member of the Association of Exploration
Geochemists. I have been practicing my profession for 38 years in Canada and abroad. I
am a Qualified Person as defined under NI 43-101.
3. I audited the Hochschild Mining plc mine laboratories at Arcata, Ares, and Selene Peru
during the period January 13 to 17, 2009.
4. I am responsible for this complete report.
5. I am not aware of any material fact or material item that could change or affect the
conclusions contained in this report.
6. I am an independent consultant. I do not have or expect to have any interest in any
Hochschild or the Hochschild projects.
7. I have read NI 43-101 and its companion policies. This report concerns only two
technical aspects of the requirements of NI 43-101, namely the quality control and
laboratory aspects, and does not follow the guidelines for a NI 43-101 report.
8. I give permission to Hochschild to use this report or any portion thereof in any manner
with respect to bettering the mine laboratories or in future securities reports or filings.
Submitted on February 10, 2009 in electronic format only,
____________________________________________________ 29
Peru, January, 2009
Appendix 1
Laboratory Audit Guideline and Best Practices
____________________________________________________ 30
Peru, January, 2009
1. Laboratory Audit Overview
An analytical laboratory is the heart of a resource delineation program. All economic

parameters and production design decisions are ultimately based upon analyses from the
laboratory. The historical perspective is that the analyses are always correct, however
experience in commercial and mine laboratory monitoring has shown that this implicit
trust in laboratory analyses can be misplaced, and can seriously hamper sound decision
making and investment decisions. An external examiner who can spot laboratory
shortcuts or QC deficiencies should periodically audit a laboratory and correct these
before poor practices become entrenched.
An audit, which has the intent of placing a level of proficiency on the laboratory, must be
done in a consistent and fair manner. To attain this consistency, an audit should be
controlled by an Audit Form, which forces the auditor to ask the same questions, and
follow the same routine for each lab examined. This assumes that the laboratory is
following industry-accepted practices for geochemical and assay analysis. A copy of my
Audit Form is shown in Appendix 1.
1.1 Sample Receiving and Sorting

A few explanations should be made regarding the audit protocol. An audit begins at
Sample Receiving and Sorting, where samples should be documented and organized
within the laboratory. The lab should have a log-in book, which allocates a work order or
job number to each set of samples arriving at the lab as the samples are counted and
sorted in numerical order (assuming the client has sample tags or tickets). Discrepancies
between sample submission forms and the sample count should be dealt with and
resolved before the samples enter the lab. Once samples are placed in the dryer, or into
the sample preparation room, they should be completely documented as to origin,
methods to be used, and the sample numbers in the job. Some labs have this information
entered onto a Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS), which can print
labels for the sample bags as well as track the progress of samples through the lab. This is
the preferred method, as sample-numbering errors are minimized, and bookkeeping is
____________________________________________________ 31
Peru, January, 2009
automated. Laboratories that use bar code scanners to enter sample numbers and track
sample flow with the LIMS usually have the least number of data entry mistakes. Also,
labs that weigh each sample as it enters the lab, and records this weight on the LIMS are
preferred over labs that do not. The weight of sample can often be useful when tracing a
sample miss-ordering error, and can be used to address sampling precision problems.
The LIMS should also automatically insert the quality control samples into the job, so
that the job is complete before the samples enter the preparation section. This should
include a preparation duplicate, a preparation blank, a pulp duplicate, and standards that
are appropriate for the analyses being done and the size of the batch. Once this is done, a
job sheet should be produced for each work station that will be used to complete the job.
The job sheet should accompany the samples for each job, and be referred to by the
workers. Sample miss-ordering can occur during sample preparation when workers do
not compare the labels on a pulp or reject bag (produced by the LIMS as a batch) with the
job sheet, and the sample ticket in the samples.
1.2 Sample Preparation
Sample Preparation is the next step in the analytical procedure. The purpose of sample
preparation is to reduce the mean grain size of the sample to the smallest possible,
homogenize the sample, split a portion of the original sample for analyses, and still
maintain sample flow and economical viability. The audit examines all aspects of the
preparation portion of the lab and notes the routine cleaning and QC procedures.
Whenever possible, the procedures actually used by the sample preparation technicians
are observed.
A few comments should be made as to the biases of this author. The sample preparation
laboratory should be designed to have a simple and logical flow of samples, preferably in
a straight line. Samples should be delivered to the front of the preparation line where they
are sorted and placed on trolleys. The trolleys should then go directly to the dryer with
minimal movement. From the dryer the trolleys go directly to the crusher line, then to the
splitter, and finally to the pulverizer, all with minimal movement.
____________________________________________________ 32
Peru, January, 2009
A working sample prep room may be somewhat dusty: this is almost unavoidable,
especially if the lab does not use a plenum
dust abatement arrangement. However the
room and equipment should not be dirty, or
have layers of dust coating the equipment or
lab walls and floors. Dust should not be
continuously in the air. Rock fragments
should not be on the floor, or hung up on
A spotless sample preparation laboratory. equipment. An example of a clean sample

This lab was not warned of the audit but preparation lab is shown in the accompany
was completely clean.
photo. This is what I normally expect and can
see in many labs. A clean preparation room is not impossible.
All samples submitted to a laboratory should first be dried as a standard protocol. No

exceptions! Even five percent moisture content in a sample, which is usually deemed to
be dry, will create a five percent bias upon weighing. Samples should be removed from
the shipping sample bags and placed with the sample tag into a metal drying tray,
preferably made from stainless steel. This drying tray or pan should not have any sharp
corners, bends or cracks and should be cleaned with water between samples. If the
sample was damp or wet, the shipping bag should be turned inside-out, and placed on top
of the sample. In this case, the sample, tag, and bag should be dried together. Once dry,
the sample bag should be discarded after the worker has again checked the sample
number on the outside of the bag against the sample tag, and against the job sheet
(printed by the LIMS after log-in) and the bag cleaned into the drying pan. This
procedure ensures that: the entire sample is dried and no sample is lost during drying and
transport in the lab; the sample tag in the bag is the same as the sample number on the
bag; that any wet sample has been removed from the bag and added to the sample tray;
and that any loss of fines from the sample bag itself during transport within the lab is
prevented. This is an important observation, especially in dry climates such as Australia,
as many geologists ship samples in cloth bags, which leak fines from the field to the lab,
____________________________________________________ 33
Peru, January, 2009
and then all over the lab during the sample preparation process. The use of cloth sample
bags, especially with dealing with RC or RAB cuttings, should be discouraged.
Sample dryers should be able to accommodate moveable trolleys. Sample trays should be
handled only once from entrance to the dryer to placement in front of the jaw crusher.
The drying temperature for exploration samples such as soils or sediments should not
exceed 70° C but run-of-mine or drill samples can be dried at more than 100° C. The
difference in the allowable drying temperatures relates to the end use of the samples.
Exploration samples are often analyzed for pathfinder elements such as mercury, arsenic
or antimony, which have a high vapor pressure and can be volatilized at higher
temperatures. Also, exploration samples may be used for detailed rock alteration studies.
Drying temperatures above 100° C result in the loss of the water of hydration of some
minerals, which affects the mass balance of whole rock analysis. Clay altered samples
can become hygroscopic if dried at a high temperature, thus the mass of the sample will
change depending on the amount of clay, and the humidity in the lab. The air entrance to
the dryers should originate from outside the laboratory, not from the preparation room.
This air intake should not be subject to contamination from other outside sources such as
dust in the sample preparation room. The temperature should be controlled by a digital
thermostat.
Dryers should not have a single point

source for heat. The hot air should be fed
into the dryer equally at all levels. Many
dryers in Africa and some in Australia
use a gas-burner blowing into one part of
the dryer enclosure. This should be
discouraged. A proper dryer design is
shown in the accompanying photo.
Laboratories that operate two parallel sample preparation sections: one for high grade and
one for exploration and low grade samples are given a higher rating than labs that do not.
____________________________________________________ 34
Peru, January, 2009
The less sample handling the better, therefore labs which use a two stage crush to get to -
2mm (if they do), such as a rolls, hammer, or cone mill are considered to be less desirable
than labs which use a one stage crush to produce -2mm.
The jaw crusher is the first step in sample grain size reduction. All samples should be
crushed (even RAB and RC cuttings) in their entirety before splitting. Failure to do this
will result in poorer sampling precision. Jaws should be able to reduce the grain size of
samples to at least 85 % -2mm in a single pass. Presently there are three jaws on the
market that can do this: Rocklabs Boyd, TM Engineering Rhino, and TM Engineering
Terminator. Two other crushers are in the testing stage: one from Labtechessa and one
from China. Some laboratories have installed a 2 mm shaker screen next to the jaws to
ensure that the -2mm protocol is complied with in each sample. This can also speed up
the crushing of RAB and RC cuttings by first screening the sample and then crushing
only the oversize. It is a small expense for a must faster sample treatment. It also allows
the laboratory to advertise that all samples have been subjected to a quality control step to
monitor the crush size.
The dust control systems used in laboratories should be designed for the type of samples
being handled. I much prefer the plenum-style
dust box to the direct suction piping systems. The
plenum, with the equipment imbedded into the
negative pressure curtain, does not allow dust or
sample fragments to escape into the laboratory. It
also does not remove fine particles from the
sample while the sample is being treated as shown
in the photo. This is a photo of the inside of a jaw crusher showing the direct suction
from the bottom of a jaw crusher, where fines were removed from samples as the samples
were being crushed. Every sample is essentially ruined, with no recourse. This may also
occur in automated or semi-automated sample preparation systems. I pay special attention
to this type of dust control system. A well thought out and engineered make-up air return
____________________________________________________ 35
Peru, January, 2009
system should be part of the dust control plan. The make-up air should originate from
outside of the preparation laboratory if the laboratory is sealed, as in colder climates.
All pieces of equipment in the lab should have an established cleaning protocol using
blank abrasive material. All stations should also have the cleaning material at, or close
by, the equipment to be cleaned. If the cleaning material, such as coarse quartz, or river
gravel is not at the station, the lab probably does not use it routinely. The dust control
outlets should ideally be filtered and not vented directly into the atmosphere, whether a
plenum or a direct suction.
Sample splitting (sample size reduction) is the next step in the sample preparation
process. There are two types of splitters used in laboratories: riffle or Jones splitters and
rotary sample dividers. One must be aware that these two types are actually doing two
different things. The riffle splitter does split the entire sample in half is done correctly.
The rotary sample divider takes a cut of a sample at a specific place, leaving the
remainder of the sample un-sampled. I have yet to see any comparison of precision on
these two methods.
The riffle splitters should be made of smooth

stainless steel and be of a size compatible with the
sample being split. Small pulps should be split
with a micro-splitter. The splitters should not
show signs of wear on the edges, as this is an
indication that the samples are not being correctly
split in half (see photo). Both types of splitters
should be under full dust control.
The use of multi-pan rotary splitters for routine exploration or drill samples is not
common as they tend to be slower than riffle splitters and also generate considerable dust
when dumping the pans into sample bags. Additionally, the sample can be somewhat
compromised if a vibrating bed is used to introduce the sample into the pans from the
____________________________________________________ 36
Peru, January, 2009
hopper. The vibrating feeder tends to classify samples according to grain size and specific
gravity: neither of which are desirable.
There are many different sample pulverizers now available, however the most commonly
used machine is the Labtechessa LM-2. This author prefers to pulverize a pulp which is
larger than the 250 g size that has been normal industry practice up until about 10 years
ago, but small enough that preparation economics, sampling theory, and quality control
are not compromised. The routine use of 250 g size ring and puck “shatterbox” style
pulverizers has been replaced in most of the world’s labs with the larger LM-2 or B2000
single puck bowl, which can produce a 0.8 to 1.0 kg size pulp.
Several years ago a number of North and South American labs installed the much larger
Australian-made LM-5 fixed-bowl pulverizers that produce a 3-5 kg pulp. These were
originally introduced to the industry because of the mistaken idea that a larger pulp would
significantly reduce the sampling error. The production of a larger pulp has been shown
to have little effect on the overall sampling precision (Smee and Stanley, 2005; Stanley
and Smee, 2005). I have a bias against the use of the LM-5, for a number of reasons:
• These larger pulverizers often take the whole rock sample submitted, not leaving
a coarse reject, nor permitting a preparation duplicate to be inserted into the
sample stream. A preparation duplicate permits the calculation of the preparation
and sampling errors using the method of Thompson and Howarth (1978), which is
becoming an industry standard method and is used during an audit of analytical
data. The method is also extremely useful in detecting sampling errors introduced
by nugget-effects. By not taking a duplicate at the preparation stage, the presence
of nuggets in the original sample is difficult to quantify.
• By taking the entire sample, a nearly pristine sample that can be used again for
future work is not available. Sample sequences that have been mixed during
preparation or analysis cannot be un-mixed using a reject. The samples are
essentially ruined.
• Loss of the sample pulp due to careless handling and storage or fire will again
lose the entire investment in obtaining the sample.
____________________________________________________ 37
Peru, January, 2009
• The amount of dust generated from the LM-5 is usually greatly in excess of what
is permissible in a laboratory because of losses generated by lifting the large puck
from the bowl with a hydraulic lifter. The action of cleaning the pulverizer with
either forced air or vacuum usually spreads dust through the entire sample
preparation area.
• The entire sample is not passed onto the sample bag: only a small scoop of sample
from the top of the bowl is usually taken. The analytical sample is not checked at
all for segregation in the large bowl.
• The large and heavy puck essentially flattens and rolls free gold in the pulverizer
bowl, making the sampling statistics worse, rather than better, than a smaller
sample prepared in a B2000 bowl. More on this in a later section.
• The North and South American labs, as well as those in Europe and much of
Africa have discontinued the use of LM-5’s. These pulverizers are the standard
equipment in Australia.
I prefer not to use LM-5 pulverizers in routine preparation of exploration or drill samples.
All equipment is usually cleaned by using a compressed air hose and gun in the case of
the jaw crusher and splitter, or a vacuum cleaner in the case of pulverizer bowls. The
compressor should have a water and oil filter in the air line to remove excess humidity or
oil leaking from the cylinders. These filters should be serviced and emptied daily if the
humidity in the location is high.
The quality control procedures used in a preparation lab should include the frequent
cleaning of the coarse crushing equipment with a barren abrasive and a cleaning of
pulverizers with an abrasive between each sample. All labs should perform a periodic
screen test of both the initial crush product and the final pulverizer product to insure that
the grain size specifications are being met. The minimum requirements for these screen
tests are one sample per sample batch, or 40 samples, which ever is smaller. The
optimum grain size of the initial crush can be determined using a nomographic test,
however the practical and economic aspects of analysis dictate that most laboratories can
reduce a solid sample to approximately 85 % –2 mm, or about 10 mesh in an efficient and
____________________________________________________ 38
Peru, January, 2009
economical manner using a jaw crusher or jaw crusher-fine-crusher combination. A
B2000 pulverizer should produce a product of at least 95 % -150 mesh, or 85 % -200
mesh. The QC data from these two sources must be recorded as proof of the quality of
preparation, and be open to examination. The QC data should be charted and placed in
the sample preparation lab on a regular basis for both workers and clients to see. As well,
the preparation lab should routinely prepare a geological blank that is analyzed and
reported with each work order as proof of cleanliness throughout the entire analytical
process. The usual position of this preparation blank is the first sample in a work order.
The preparation laboratory should also have a daily maintenance schedule that includes
an inspection of each piece of equipment: the crushers should be greased and the excess
grease removed from the bottom of the machine to prevent the grease from spilling into
the sample pans; each pulverizer should be examined to ensure that each bowl, puck and
lid combination is intact, not worn excessively, that all the bowls have rubber seals on the
lids; the splitters are clean and free from grease that may have been transferred from the
crushers; the dust filters are clean at the beginning of the shift; and the air compressor
filters have been inspected and emptied if necessary.
1.3 Fire Assay
The Fire Assay Room should be separated from the main laboratory by a sealed wall, or
be in a completely separate building. The room should be large enough to organize
several batches of samples at one time without the possibility of sample mix-ups, and
should be completely free of clutter or dust. The fire floor should be designed so that a
single stream of samples moves from the weighing area, to the flux addition and mixing
area, to the fusion furnaces, to the breaking and cleaning area, and then to the cupellation
furnaces. The labs should be well lit with suitable electric lighting, especially over the
weighing and prill transfer area.
Some labs have the sample weighing balance on the fire floor. The balance should be on
a proper balance table, be calibrated daily with certified weights of the appropriate value,
and have all the necessary standards next to the weighing area. (More on standards in a
later section). The balance should be connected directly to the LIMS, and the job sheets
____________________________________________________ 39
Peru, January, 2009
should accompany the samples and be placed directly in front of the LIMS so that sample
numbers on the pulp bags can be checked against both the sheets and the LIMS before
weighing.
Samples can be weighed into the fusion pot directly, or into a plastic bag that is placed
into the fusion pot or in some instances where there is a central weighing room, into a
small envelope that is then placed into the fusion pot. The latter instance is not
encouraged, as it is another step where sample miss-ordering can occur.
The introduction of the flux chemicals and the litharge should be done in a well-
ventilated fume hood. The fusion and cupel furnaces, and the cupel cooling area must be
well ventilated, and the air exits for both the fusion and cupel furnaces must be placed
into a bag house to capture and filter all fumes. The airflow to the lab must be designed
such that the makeup air to the fire floor balances the outgoing air through the fume
hoods. Full safety equipment must be worn by the personnel on the fire floor. Their Pb
levels in blood should be monitored at least twice a year.
The sample and the flux must be extremely well-mixed to obtain a good and consistent
fusion. The litharge should be from a source that is known to produce non-contaminated
lead, such as North American ASARCO, South Africa or Australia. Peruvian-based
litharge can often contain low level gold and silver concentrations. This source of
materials should be known to the fire assayer. Ideally, each sample should be examined
by a certified fire assayer who can assess the bulk chemistry and adjust the flux mixture
accordingly to avoid fusion problems. Unfortunately the only school teaching fire assay
methods is the British Colombia Institute of Technology, who offer a two year course in
fire assaying. This is an extremely demanding course, with a considerable amount of
practical experience introduced, as well as chemistry, mineralogy, geology and an
analytical practicum. Graduates of this course have earned a Certified Fire Assay diploma
and are hired before finishing their course. Laboratories and mining companies should
sponsor promising students to complete the course, with a pledge of working for the
____________________________________________________ 40
Peru, January, 2009
sponsor for a fixed amount of time. This is done by the Vancouver-based laboratories,
which is why most of the Vancouver labs have Certified Assayers on staff.
The poorer laboratories account for varying sample matrices by simply reducing the
sample weight used until the fusion is deemed acceptable. Often this reduction in sample
weight is not communicated to the client. This is not acceptable practice.
The best labs operate two sets of fusion and cupellation furnaces: one set for high grade
and one set for exploration and low grade samples. Both fusion and cupel ovens must be
clean and free from stalactites. The furnaces should be well vented and be operated at
industry accepted temperatures for each step. North and South American and African
laboratories fuse samples at 1100 ºC to 1150 °C and cupel lead buttons at 950 °C.
Australian labs I have audited seem to run between 1035 ºC and 1100 ºC. The weight of
Pb buttons is usually around 30 g with a 30 or 50 g sample weight. The amount of flux
added (averaging about 45 % PbO) is between 160 to 200 g. Australian labs usually add
far less litharge to a 30 g sample, which produces problem results when sulphides are
encountered. The loading and unloading of fusion pots from ovens is now almost
universally by Furnace Industries auto-pour systems in modern labs. The better labs have
a worker pouring the molten samples into an iron mould with an assayer watching the
quality of the fusion. The poorer labs do not examine the fusion as the sample is poured.
It is essential to clean the Pb buttons of slag completely. This is usually done by

hammering the button on an anvil until the button is clean. This improves analytical
precision by preventing spitting of the silica during the cupellation process.
A foolproof method of keeping track of sample order and of crucibles should be an

integral part of the fire assay protocol. The order control methods include the introduction
of Cu to selected samples so that the cupels turn blue or green, or the addition of extra Ag
(often called doublets or triplets) during the inquart to produce a large prill at a known
location. Failure to do any of the above will usually lead to sample order mishaps.
____________________________________________________ 41
Peru, January, 2009
Every lab tries to save money where ever possible, as they are a business attempting to
provide shareholder value. One of the most common places to save a considerable
amount of money is to re-use the fusion pots. This is acceptable as long as the entire
history of each sample in each pot is recorded. Each laboratory has a ceiling
concentration where pots are discarded because of the fear of cross contamination with
the next sample to be placed into the pot. The method of order control, storage of used
pots and record keeping is examined during the audit. A solid paperwork trail is expected.
Obviously, the lower the discard concentration the better.
Almost all labs outside of Australia use two methods for finishing gold assays: either
instrumentation where the entire prill is dissolved in aqua regia, or gravimetric where the
prill is parted in 25 % (or less) HNO3 and the gold is weighed on a microbalance. For
whatever reason, few labs in Australia recognize that better precision on the high grade
samples is attained with a gravimetric finish. Perhaps they are confusing accuracy with
precision. The concentration used for switching between the two finishes depends on the
laboratory and the instrument calibrations used. I prefer to switch methods at about 5 g/t
Au.
The microbalance should be in a closed room, connected directly to the LIMS, mounted
on a vibration-free table, be well lit and the table overlain with a light colored cover so
that dropped gold can be seen and recovered without contamination. The microbalance
should be calibrated daily, and the calibration recorded in a book or on the LIMS.
1.4 Wet Laboratory
A Wet Lab usually includes the weighing room, the acid digestion equipment in fume
hoods, and the wet assay equipment and glassware used to prepare samples for atomic
absorption or ICP analysis. The wet lab should be clean, free of clutter and glassware
should be stored under cover. The lab must have a source of distilled or deionized water
that is tested for purity daily. The wet lab should be sealed from the rest of the laboratory
by closed doors. An air intake should bring air from the outside to balance the air that is
removed by the fumehoods otherwise the lab will be at a negative pressure.
____________________________________________________ 42
Peru, January, 2009
The Weighing Room should also be separated from the main lab and always have the
door closed to prevent contamination of the
samples, standards, and balances. Balance rooms
should be of sufficient size to handle multiple
work orders at one time, and should be clean and
free from clutter. Ideally, all balances should be
positioned on vibration-free balance tables and
must be leveled using the attached bubble level.
Balance room, clean and organized.
Standard weights for calibration easily This should be done each shift when the
available (box), standards near each
LIMS station. balances are calibrated. Labs should have
balances hooked into the LIMS. Sample weights
on balances attached to LIMS are not weighed to an exact weight, but only to ± 10% of
the target weight (known as catch weights). Weights are automatically recorded by the
computer, which does the calculations for the final analysis. This procedure increases
sample throughput, and decreases the amount of paperwork. However, the sample
weights used in fire assay may be less than what is usually used for analysis because of
sample matrix problems. The weighing personnel must be able to highlight this change of
weight on the LIMS and to the supervisor to ensure the correct procedure is used for
calculating the final concentration.
Balances should be calibrated daily using certified weights, and this calibration must be
recorded in a book or on the LIMS. Balances should also be certified by an external
standards organization on a yearly basis, with a certificate appearing on each balance.
Obviously, the certified weights for calibration must be in the balance room, close to the
balances. The weights used for calibration should be the same as the weights used for
sample analyses: if 0.5 g is used for digestion, the balance should be calibrated with a 0.5
g certified weight. All sample-weighing rooms must contain the relevant certified
standards used by the labs to monitor their own accuracy. Frequency of standard insertion
is chosen by the LIMS, and appears on the worksheet that accompanies the samples
through the lab.
____________________________________________________ 43
Peru, January, 2009
Hot plates should be modified so as to distribute heat evenly to all containers, such as
using a water bath or metal block tube or beaker holders. All hot plates should have a
digital temperature control. Hot plates that are used for “total digestion” may use direct
heat to the test tubes or beakers but the solutions must be taken to total dryness.
Perchloric acid-style or HF acid fumehoods must be capable of being washed daily.
Glassware for different sample types should be labeled and handled separately. For
instance, glassware for concentrates or high-grade samples should never come in contact
with glassware for exploration samples. “Total Digestion” methods require the use of HF
acid therefore a set of Teflon ware should be used in the lab. Substitution of other forms
of plastic beakers for digestions is not acceptable.
Auto-pipettes that quickly dispense acids to tubes or beakers should be calibrated by

weight on a daily basis and this weight recorded in a book or on the LIMS. This is done
by knowing the specific gravity of the acid and by weighing the volume dispensed on a
sensitive balance. The actual volume dispensed can then be computed and compared to
the intended volume.
The Instrument Facilities should be contained in a separate room and be sealed from the
rest of the lab. The atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS) and inductively coupled
plasma (ICP) units should be ventilated to the outside. Most AAS and ICP units have an
air intake for a ventilation fan. This intake has an air filter that should be examined for
dust. This is usually a good indication of the overall cleanliness of the lab. The AAS and
ICP should be hooked directly into the LIMS, which allows automatic calibration of the
equipment and prevents transcription errors. Most labs make calibration standards from
high concentration stock solutions. These stock solutions should be stored in the dark in a
sealed cupboard. The calibration standards should be stored in a sealed cupboard and be
made at least every two weeks. Gold calibration standards should be made daily. The date
that the standard was made, the expiration date and the name of the maker should be on
each bottle. Newly made AAS standards should be cross correlated using the absorption
readings with the old standards and the two absorption readings captured in a book to
ensure that the standards have been made and mixed correctly.
____________________________________________________ 44
Peru, January, 2009
All acid-filled containers such as test tubes or

flasks and beakers should not be open to the air
in the instrument room. The better labs seal the
top of the racks of tubes in the digestion area,
or transport the open tubes to a ventilated
holding cupboard before being analyzed. Each
measuring instrument should be equipped with
an auto sampler that is enclosed in a Plexiglas
Instrument room showing vented box that is vented to the outside. This will
Plexiglas enclosures to prevent acid
fumes from eating the instruments. prevent acid fumes from attacking these very
expensive and sensitive pieces of equipment.
Such an arrangement is illustrated in the accompanying photo. Laboratories that have not
thought this through do not take care of their own equipment, why should they take care
of a client’s samples?
Wet Laboratory Quality Control methods must include the use of standards to monitor
accuracy over the short and long term, preparation and analytical blanks to monitor
contamination, and preparation and pulp duplicates to assess laboratory precision.
Standards used in a lab can be expensive CRM’s (certified reference material) that have
been subjected to an extensive multi-lab round robin to determine the consensus mean
and error; purchased standards that also have a consensus mean and error established by a
less intensive round robin; or in-house standards that have been certified by a round robin
that includes outside laboratories. The important aspect for standards to be acceptable is
that the results of the round robin, the number of analysis and laboratories that
participated in the round robin, and the method of calculating the mean and error must be
known. The matrix of each standard should also be known so that the correct standard is
used with the geological samples being submitted. Without these items, usually appearing
on a certificate, the standards are not acceptable. Laboratories that do not have a traceable
____________________________________________________ 45
Peru, January, 2009
history for their standards cannot be considered to be using industry “Best Practices”. The
frequency of standard insertion should be at least one per laboratory batch, which may be
determined by the size of a fire assay oven batch, or the size of a test tube rack.
The concentration range and matrix of the standards should match as closely as possible
the concentration and matrix of the samples being submitted. This requires the laboratory
to have more than one standard for an element, and preferably a range of concentrations
and at least matrices that includes both oxide and un-oxidized material. Most mine
laboratories should have standards made from the mine feed, so that the matrix and grade
of the standards match the samples being submitted. Custom-made standards can be
developed by companies such as CDN Labs in Canada (www.cdnlabs.com).
As previously mentioned, laboratories should routinely use both preparation and

analytical blanks to monitor contamination. The results of these blanks should be
captured and tracked by the laboratory QC manager.
Most laboratories analyze pulp duplicates as part of their internal quality control
program. Fewer labs also analyze preparation duplicates that originate from the coarse
crush sample preparation room. Fewer labs yet actually capture this data and do
something with it. In essence the duplicates are wasted analyses. It is imperative that the
laboratories present all duplicate information to the client, even if they consider the
duplicates to be beyond their normal limits for precision. The laboratory should assess the
sample preparation and analytical precision using the preparation and pulp duplicates, but
it is the task of the geologist to assess the precision related to geology using the field
duplicates.
All laboratories should have a defined Chain-of-Command and a fixed set of rules for the
acceptance of QC information. Most laboratories monitor standards on a batch-by-batch
basis: they either pass or fail based on some fixed criteria. These criteria should be based
upon the actual certified error values (“between laboratory” standard deviations, not
confidence intervals) found on the certificate. Many commercial laboratories do not use
____________________________________________________ 46
Peru, January, 2009
these certified limits; they manufacture their own “percentage from the mean” limits
based upon the method being used. I do not accept this procedure, as the limits vary with
concentration: the lab is just making up their criteria rather than basing it on actual
information that incorporates the matrix and the homogeneity of the standard.
Few laboratories use standards to monitor batch bias. Batch bias is usually defined as two
standards in a row that are more than two standard deviations from the mean on the same
side of the mean. Normally, different standards are inserted into analytical batches in
sequence. In order to properly monitor batch bias, all standards must be monitored
together. I know of only one laboratory that does this routinely. The LIMS should be
programmed to monitor all the standards in a batch for bias.
All QC data should be captured on a LIMS, and should be plotted over both short and
long time periods. This plotting should include all standards, blanks and duplicates.
Standard plots should be done at least monthly, and placed in the laboratory for the
analysts and clients to see. A yearly summary of the QC results should be produced in
graphical format. This should include all standards, blanks and duplicates. The overall
laboratory precision for both pulp and preparation duplicates should be calculated using
the methods of Thompson and Howarth (1978) on a monthly basis.
An often over-looked aspect of a geological lab is the Warehouse and Sample Storage
facility. An important part of exploration and resource delineation requires that sample
pulps or rejects from previous programs must be retained for a time in case reanalysis is
needed, either to confirm previous analysis, produce composites for metallurgical testing,
or manufacture standards to control future drill campaigns. Samples should be stored
under cover and in a well-organized fashion. Ideally, the location of work orders should
be captured on the LIMS.
____________________________________________________ 47
Peru, January, 2009
References
Smee, B.W., Stanley, C.R., 2005: Sample preparation of “nuggety” samples: dispelling
some myths about sample size and sampling errors. Explore, 126, p.21-26.
Stanley C.R. and Smee, B.W., 2005: Reply to Dr. Dominique Franceois-Bongarceon re:
Sample preparation of ‘nuggety’ samples: dispelling some myths about sample
size and sampling errors. Explore number 127, p. 19-23.
Thompson, M. and Howarth, R.J., 1978: A new approach to the estimation of analytical
precision. J. Geochem. Explor., 9: 23-30.
____________________________________________________ 48
Peru, January, 2009
Appendix 1
Laboratory Audit Form
____________________________________________________ 49
Peru, January, 2009
Laboratory Audit Guideline
Laboratory Name:
Address:
Phone:
Fax:
E-Mail:
Manager:
Over All Building Description:
Sample Receiving and Sorting:

Sorting Tables or Space
Work Order Book:
Computer Entry: -
Sample Preparation:
Size of Room:
Drying Facilities and Capacity: -
Temperature control:
Type of drying pans:
Preparation Equipment:
Jaws (make, dust control): -
Rolls: -
Other crushers:-
Pulverizers: - (make, dust control):
Work Bench: (type, dust control):
Cleaning Material for Jaw and Pulverizer: -
Type and Location: -
Splitters: -
Dust Control Outlet: -
____________________________________________________ 50
Peru, January, 2009
Type of Pulp Bags: -

Type of Reject Bags: -
Air Hoses and Compressor: -
Condition of Equipment: -
Overall Cleanliness: -
Prep QC Methods:
Frequency of Prep Dups:
Frequency of Screen Tests: Coarse Reject:
Pulp: -
QC Book for Prep: -
QC Limits for crush:
QC Limits for pulp:
QC Plotted:
Geological Blank Analyzed from Sample Prep:
Method of handling client’s standards:
Can make standards?:
Fire Assay Facilities

Overall Description of Room: -
Weighing Room (LIMS, fire assay):
Batch size: (mix clients in batches?):
Flux Mixing System: -

Source of litharge: -
Fusion Furnaces:
Cupel Furnaces: -
Method of Order Control: -
Method of Inquart: -
____________________________________________________ 51
Peru, January, 2009
Ventilation and Safety: -
Reject level for Crucibles (ppb): -
Wet Laboratory
Size: -
Batch size for geochem:
Batch size for wet assay:
Cleanliness: -
Distilled Water Source: -
Hot Plates: -
Temp. controlled: -
Glassware (calibrated?): -
Teflonware: -
Calibration of Auto Pipettes: -

Recorded for inspection:
Sealed acid tubes?:
Elements Analyzed: -
Instrument Facilities:
Separate Room: -
Make and Model AAS: -
Dedicated AAS (Elements Analyzed): -
ICP-ES: -
ICP-MS: -
Other Instruments: -
Storage of Calibration Standards (Names and Dates):
Cross reference new with old AAS standards:
____________________________________________________ 52
Peru, January, 2009
Recorded in book?:
Weighing Room (geochem and wet assay):

Sample Balance (LIMS): -
Micro Balance (LIMS): -
Sealed Room: -
Balance Tables: -
Calibration: -
In-house with book: -
External with certificate:-
Quality Control Methods
In house Geological Standards

Au Fire Assay Frequency: -
Au Fire Assay Range: -
PGM Fire Assay Frequency:
PGM Fire Assay Range: - Pt: Pd: Rh:
Base Metals Assay Frequency: -
Base Metals Assay Range: - Cu: Pb: Zn: Ag:

Ni: Mo:
Round Robin done for limits:
Frequency Certified Reference Material: -
Preparation Duplicates: -
Pulp Duplicates: -
Blanks in: Prep: -
Analytical: -
QC Manager: -
QC Charts for Each Element: -
____________________________________________________ 53
Peru, January, 2009
Type of Internal Rules for QC:
ISO Certified (Level):
Warehouse and Storage

Pulp and Reject Storage: -
Organization: -
Reporting
LIMS: -
Database type: -
Autofax or E-mail: -
Standard Reporting Format: -
Report all internal QC to client:
Billing: -
Personnel
Total: -
Number of Trained Technicians: -
Number of Shifts: -
Standards Submitted
Sample
Number Standard Accepted Au, g/t Assayed Au, g/t z score
Photos
____________________________________________________ 54
Peru, January, 2009
Appendix 2
Arcata Laboratory Audit Form
____________________________________________________ 55
Peru, January, 2009
Laboratory Name: Arcata Mine Laboratory, Hochschild Group, Peru
Address:
Phone: 511-318 2000 ext. 3536
Fax:
E-Mail: alex.cajahuanea@hocplc.com
Manager: Alex Cajahuanea Espinal

Cement and brick building located near plant. Long hallway connects rooms off either
side. Most rooms are small. Sample prep is farthest from the front door and fire assay
nearest the entrance. Lab is built backwards.

Sorting Tables or Space: Very small receiving and sorting area in space outside of main
prep. room. Samples are first sorted into order and discrepancies noted and sent to
client for solution. Space is very small for a large shipment of samples.
Work Order Book: Lab uses sequential numbers to track shipments. Placed into Excel by
hand.
Computer Entry (LIMS): No LIMS. Excel does listing and calculations but all labels
numbered by hand.
Sample Preparation:
Size of Room: large single room that has been modified since last visit. Dryer on one end
of room and crushers and splitters at far end. Pulverizers in a separate adjoining room.
Drying Facilities and Capacity: - 1 large gas-fired dryer, uses trolleys and about 145
samples at one time. Have smaller dryer on standby.
Temperature control: Yes, with sensor on top of dryer. Use 95 C for geology and plant
samples at 130 C.
Type of drying pans: stainless steel pans lined with paper. Wash pans between each
sample use. Clients only provide one ticket for samples.
Jaws or crushers: 2 x TM Terminators, one primary and one secondary. Equipment is
clean and corners are sealed. Must watch for grease from bearings falling into
samples.
(dust control): Placed into small plenum, and have an airblast for equipment. Not
too bad.
Rolls crushers: No.
____________________________________________________ 56
Peru, January, 2009
Other crushers: No.
Pulverizers: 2 x LM-2 using small bowls. One bowl requires replacement. Should be
using larger bowls, at least B1000 size.
(dust control): Good.
Splitters: 1 large riffle with 4 pans. All in good condition. Split out about 150 to 250 g.
Should split about 500 g.
Work Bench: (type, dust control): Good bench with good dust control. Require good
lighting at all stations.
Cleaning Material for Jaw and Pulverizer(type and location): Quartz at all stations.
Frequency and Use: 1 in 48 is a sterile sample for assay, clean jaw at he

beginning of a batch, then every 20 samples. Pulverizers cleaned between each
sample.
Dust Control Outlet: To outside directly.
Type of Pulp Bags: kraft paper.

Type of Reject Bags: plastic.
Air Hoses and Compressor:

Frequency of Bleeding of Water: two compressors with 1 large filter. Supposed to
bleed every day. Must make sure this is done.
Number and location of filters: 1 at site of compressor.
Condition of Equipment: Good.
Overall Cleanliness: Good.
Prep QC Methods:
Frequency of Prep Dups: 1 in 48
Frequency of Screen Tests: Coarse Reject: 3/48
Pulp: 3/48
QC Book for Prep: Yes.
QC Limits for crush: 85 % - 10 mesh.
QC Limits for pulp: 90 % -200 mesh.
QC Plotted: Yes.
____________________________________________________ 57
Peru, January, 2009
Geological Blank Analyzed from Sample Prep: Yes, 1 in 48.
Method of handling client’s standards: Placed in special location until pulps ready
then re-introduced to sequence.
Can make standards?: no.

Sample Balance (LIMS): Fire Assay: No LIMS. 4 place balance used to 3 places.
Geology samples weigh 25 g. tails weigh 30 g and concentrate weigh 5 g.
Geochem and Wet Assay: 4 place balance to 4 places and 0.5

g weight.
Micro Balance (LIMS): 2 x Mettler, one as standby. 4 weights for calibration.
Sealed Room: Fire Assay: yes, central room.

Wet Assay: as above.
Balance Tables: Fire Assay: yes.

Wet Assay: yes.
Frequency of Calibration: 2 x per day.

In-house with book: yes with 4 weights, 0.5 g, 20 g, 100 g, 200 g.
External with certificate: 1 x per year.

Overall Description of Room: two rooms, a mixing room and a furnace room.
Batch size: 48
(mix clients in batches?) no.
Flux Formula: Geology and plant: 58 % PbO, 27.5 % soda, 12.75 % borax, 1.75 %
silica, manual addition of flour; concentrate: 61.5 % PbO, 25 % soda, 9.75 % borax,
3.75 % silica.
Source of litharge: Anachemia. Lab should get the rock matrix from geology.
Amount of Flux added to 25 g sample: 130 g. or about 70 g of Pb.
Flux Mixing System: Into plastic bags and shake by hand.
Method of Inquart: no inquart required.
____________________________________________________ 58
Peru, January, 2009
Fusion Furnaces: 2 x diesel furnaces. Clean.
Temperature of fusion: 1050 C.
Time of fusion: 45-50 minutes.
Cupel Furnaces: 2 x electric.

Temperature of cupellation: 950 C.
Time of cupellation: 30-45 minutes. This should be longer, to about 50
minutes.
Size range of Pb button: 20 to 40 g.
Usual color of slag (from used fusion pots): green.
Method of breaking and cleanliness of button: hammer on anvil. Buttons are clean.
Method of Order Control: Use templates only.
Ventilation and Safety: - Good.
Reject level for Crucibles (ppb): - Use only 1 time.
Wet Laboratory
Size: Single large room with benches, hoods.
Number of Fume Hoods: 4 hoods, 1 used only for parting.
Balanced Airflow: No. Door to lab was open.
Separation of geochem and assay?: Yes. Do combination of AAS finish and grav
finish. Use 15 % HNO3 at low temp for 20 minutes, add conc. HNO3 at 200 C.
Hot Plates: three active plates. No method of evenly distributing temperature.

Temp. controlled: Yes, use IR gun on 9 points on the plate and record temp in a
book.
Batch size for geochem: 30
Batch size for wet assay: 30, 5 ml HNO3, 10 ml HCl, 3 drops HF.
Cleanliness: Good.
Distilled Water Source: Have new still.

Measure conductivity: Yes.
Teflonware: No. To be ordered.
____________________________________________________ 59
Peru, January, 2009
Fusion Furnaces: No.
Calibration of Auto Pipettes: Use water only and one time only. This should be
changed to using the actual acids once per day.
Recorded for inspection: Yes, but every day.
Glassware (calibrated?): Yes.
Sealed acid tubes?: Yes, in 100 ml flasks.
Elements Analyzed: Au, Ag, Cu, Pb, Zn, As, Fe.
Separate Room: Yes, with door closed.
Make and Model AAS: PE 400. No LIMS.
Dedicated AAS (Elements Analyzed): - Use for all base metals. Serviced once per
year.
ICP-ES: No
ICP-MS: No
Other Instruments (Leco, XRF): No.
Storage of Calibration Standards (Names and Dates): In plastic bottles every week,
dated and signed. 4 point curve.
Cross reference new with old AAS and ICP standards: Yes, but only placed in with
absorbance readings in computer.
Recorded in book?: No. Must record in a book for reference.
In house Quality Control:

Au Fire Assay Standard Frequency: 2 in batch of 48.
Au Fire Assay Standard Range (type and certified): Internal standards only. Certified.
Base Metals Standard Frequency: 1 in 30.
Base Metals Standard Assay Range (type and certified): Cu: use only CDN-SE-1
Pb: CDN-SE-1
Zn: CDN-SE-1
____________________________________________________ 60
Peru, January, 2009
Ag: CDN-SE-1
Round Robin done for limits (Certificates): Must certify internal standard for base
metals.
Frequency Certified Reference Material: n/a
Preparation Duplicate Frequency: 1 in 48 for Au and Ag
Pulp Duplicates Frequency: 1 in 48 or 1 in 30.
Blanks in: Prep Frequency: 1 in 48 or 1 in 30.
Analytical Frequency: 1 in 48 or 1 in 30.
QC Manager and Chain of QC Command: QC manager full time, night shift is cleared
in the morning.
Type of Internal Rules for QC: Standard Failures: >3 SD failure in accuracy, two in a
row > 2SD is failure in bias.
Prep. Blank Failures: 0.06 g/t Au, 6 g/t Ag. Make new
pulps from rejects.
Analytical Blank Failures: >0.02 g/t Au, > 4g/t Ag,

pulp redone.
Treatment of Duplicates: presently take nearest two

analyses.
Precision Calculations: Yes, also do % difference

plots.
Bias Monitoring: Yes.
QC Charts for Each Standard and Element: Yes, in Excel.

Short Term: Yes, by month.
Long Term: No, must do.
ISO Certified (Level): Working toward ISO17025.

Pulp and Reject Storage: Not seen.
Organization:
____________________________________________________ 61
Peru, January, 2009
Reporting
LIMS: None.
Database type: Excel.
Autofax or E-mail: Internal emails, and sent to geology with GEMMS data base.
Standard Reporting Format: fixed by GEMMS. Can transfer from Excel to GEMMS
directly.
Custom Reporting Format: No.
Report all internal QC to client: Not by batch, only weekly and monthly.
Billing: n/a
Personnel
Total: 17
Number of Trained Technicians or Chemists: 8
Number of Shifts: 2/day, 3 groups of 5 to cover swing shift.
Samples per Day: 200/d on average. 120 geology, 70/day plant, 10/d met. Some conc.
Determinations per Day: average 500/d with an additional 200/d some times.
____________________________________________________ 62
Peru, January, 2009
Standards Submitted
Sample
ART-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.34 -0.50 4
ART-2 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.32 -0.83 4
ART-3 SE-2 0.242 ± 0.018 0.24 -0.22 4
ART-4 SE-1 0.480 ± 0.034 0.48 0.0 4
Total Points 16/16

Sample
ART-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 74.48 +0.16 4
ART-2 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 71.37 -0.69 4
ART-3 SE-2 354 ± 21.0 357.11 +0.30 4
ART-4 SE-1 712 ± 57 718.03 +0.21 4
Total Points 16/16

Sample
ART-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.73 -1.13 3
ART-2 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.73 -1.13 3
ART-3 SE-2 0.049 ± 0.003 0.048 -0.67 4
ART-4 SE-1 0.097 ± 0.005 0.096 -0.40 4
Total Points 14/16

Sample
ART-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.74 +0.02 4
ART-2 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.73 -0.17 4
ART-3 SE-2 1.43 ± 0.11 1.31 -2.18 1
ART-4 SE-1 2.65 ± 0.20 2.66 +0.10 4
Total Points 13/16

Sample
ART-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.49 +0.58 4
ART-2 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.48 +0.05 4
ART-3 SE-2 0.957 ± 0.044 0.97 +0.59 4
ART-4 SE-1 1.92 ± 0.09 1.91 -0.22 4
Total Points 16/16
Photos
____________________________________________________ 63
Peru, January, 2009
Photo 2: Preparation line is linear and

well designed.
Photo 1: New dryer has been

installed.
Photo 3: Enclosures for crusher may be Photo 4: Fire assay balance would be
more efficient with doors. faster with a top loading two place
machine. LIMS would be an
advantage.
Photo 5: base metals uses only one

standard. The internal standards should be
certified for the base metals. Photo 6: Fire assay room is clean and
well organized.
____________________________________________________ 64
Peru, January, 2009
Photo 7: Good picking station. This Photo 8: Wet lab is bright and well laid
should be designed into the other labs. out. Door to lab should be closed.
Dispensers should be calibrated using the
acids rather than water.
Photo 9: Hot plate temperatures are Photo 10: AAS absorbances for new
monitored but should be evenly distributed standards should be placed in a book.
by using a sand bath.
____________________________________________________ 65
Peru, January, 2009
Appendix 3
Ares Mine Laboratory Audit Form
____________________________________________________ 66
Peru, January, 2009
Laboratory Name: Ares Mine Laboratory, Hochschild Group Peru
Address:
Phone:
Fax:
E-Mail: rafael.calvo@hocplc.com; francisco.cardenas@hocplc.com
Manager: Rafael Calvo Condado; Francisco Cardenas

Large laboratory with multiple levels. Sample receiving and preparation at side of lab,
and main fire assay and wet lab on different level and well separated from preparation.
Some re-arranging has been done since the last audit in 2007.

Sorting Tables or Space: Samples received with submission form and sorted on cement
floor. Discrepancies in numbers or count are listed and reported to client by email
before final handling of samples.
Work Order Book: Yes, done by sequential number for each day.
Computer Entry (LIMS): Hand entered into Excel. No LIMS available. All labels done
by hand.
Sample Preparation:
Size of Room: single room with dryers and all equipment above the main laboratory.
Open to outside and very cold for workers.
Drying Facilities and Capacity: - Building a large forced air dryer for trolleys. Have a
large Essa and a smaller dryer, electric.
Temperature control: digital control at 130 C.
Type of drying pans: stainless steel pans that are washed between each use.
Jaws or crushers: 2 x TM Terminators. Small amount of grease on pans from
bearings. These must be cleaned after each lubrication.
(dust control): in mini-plenum, all clean and in good condition. Must air clean corners
of crusher between each sample.
Rolls crushers: None.
Other crushers: None.
Pulverizers: 2 x LM-2 but with small bowls. All in good condition.
____________________________________________________ 67
Peru, January, 2009
(dust control): Good control.
Splitters: 1 x large riffle with new pans. In good condition.
Work Bench: (type, dust control): Good bench with rear dust control.
Cleaning Material for Jaw and Pulverizer(type and location): Quartz at crusher and
pulverizer.
Frequency and Use: Crusher cleaned 1 in 10 samples, and pulverizer between

each sample. 1 in 30 is assayed.
Dust Control Outlet: vented to outside.
Type of Pulp Bags: paper bags. Not sealed.

Type of Reject Bags: plastic bags.
Air Hoses and Compressor: Use plant air.

Frequency of Bleeding of Water: filter is checked by plant. This should be
confirmed.
Number and location of filters: n/a
Prep QC Methods:
Frequency of Prep Dups: 1 in 30.
Frequency of Screen Tests: Coarse Reject: 3 in 30 in a batch.
Pulp: 3 in 30 in a batch.
QC Book for Prep: placed into Excel.
QC Limits for crush: 85 % -12 mesh.
QC Limits for pulp: 90 % -200 mesh.
QC Plotted: Yes, done manually.
Geological Blank Analyzed from Sample Prep: 1 in 30.
Method of handling client’s standards: These are separated and recombined after pulps
prepared.
Can make standards?: No.
____________________________________________________ 68
Peru, January, 2009
Sample Balance (LIMS): Fire Assay: top loading, no LIMS, 25 g for geology, metal.
and 5 g for conc.
Geochem and Wet Assay: Mettler, 0.5 g for base metals.
Micro Balance (LIMS): 2 x balances in sealed room.
Sealed Room: Fire Assay: Yes.

Wet Assay: Yes.
Balance Tables: Fire Assay: Yes.

Wet Assay: Yes.
Frequency of Calibration: 1 x per day with 0.5, 5 , 50 and 200 g weights.

In-house with book: Yes.
External with certificate: Yes, once per year.

Overall Description of Room: 2 rooms, for fusion and cupellation.
Batch size: 30-35 samples.
(mix clients in batches?) No.
Flux Formula: 48 % PbO, 30 % soda, 20 % borax, 2 % flour, no silica.

Conc. 61.5 % PbO, 25 % soda, 9.75 % borax, 3.75 % silica.
Source of litharge: Anachemia
Amount of Flux added to 25 g sample: 160 g. or 70 g of Pb.
Flux Mixing System: weighed into plastic bag and shaken.
Method of Inquart: solid Ag sheet.
Fusion Furnaces: 1 single loading furnace. 1 small furnace.

Time of fusion: 50 minutes. (could be 10 minutes longer).
Cupel Furnaces: 2 cupels.

Time of cupellation: 45-50 minutes.
Size range of Pb button: 20-40 g.
____________________________________________________ 69
Peru, January, 2009
Usual color of slag (from used fusion pots): Not seen, but said to be light to dark
green.
Method of breaking and cleanliness of button: Done at hood with anvil. Good clean
buttons produced.
Prill picking area requires additional ventilation and a light over the picking area.
Method of Order Control: Each crucible numbered and template used. No Cu added.
Ventilation and Safety: - being installed.
Reject level for Crucibles (ppb): - use one time only.
Wet Laboratory
Size: Small single lab with not much bench space.
Number of Fume Hoods: 3 in all, 2 x large hoods and one small hood for parting. 1 is
used for digestion.
Balanced Airflow: Have open doors. Should close all doors.
Separation of geochem and assay?: n/a. Parting done with 15 % HNO3. Base metals
with HNO3, HCl, HF.
Hot Plates: 1 for parting , 2 for AAS, run at 200-250 C.

Temp. controlled: Done with IR gun, measured every day and recorded in book.
Hoods need new lights, and the temperatures on the plates need to be evened out by
using a heat sink, such as a sand bath.
Batch size for geochem: n/a
Batch size for wet assay: 30.
Cleanliness: Good.
Distilled Water Source: obtained from Arcata. Should have own still.
Measure conductivity: tested and recorded in book.
Teflonware: No, use glass beakers. This is to be included in new budget.
Fusion Furnaces: Used for annealing Au bead but in FA room. Should be placed in
wet lab.
Calibration of Auto Pipettes: Yes, by weight but only with water and not the actual
acids.
____________________________________________________ 70
Peru, January, 2009
Recorded for inspection: Yes, but only done one time. Should be done each day.
Glassware (calibrated?): No.
Sealed acid tubes?: 100 ml vol. flasks.
Elements Analyzed: Cu, Pb, Zn, Fe, As, Ag, Au.
Separate Room: Yes, door closed.
Make and Model AAS: 1 GBC, 1 Perkin Elmer 400.
Dedicated AAS (Elements Analyzed): GBC for CN solutions, PE for Au, Ag, base
metals. Service GBC every 3 months, PE every 6 months.
ICP-ES: no.
ICP-MS: no.
Other Instruments (Leco, XRF): CN instrument.
Storage of Calibration Standards (Names and Dates): Done weekly, in bottles with
dates recorded and expiration date listed.
Cross reference new with old AAS and ICP standards: Yes.
Recorded in book?: Yes.
**They must export data to csv files then hand enter into the GEMMS data base. This
should be replaced with new GEMMS from Arcata.

Au Fire Assay Standard Frequency: 2 standards per batch, 25-30 samples.
Au Fire Assay Standard Range (type and certified): internal and CDN standards.
Base Metals Standard Frequency: 1 in 30 for Cu, Pb, Zn. No internal standard. These
should be certified for base metals.
Base Metals Standard Assay Range (type and certified): Cu: Use CDN FCM-5 and
SE-2. Pb:
Zn:
Ag:
____________________________________________________ 71
Peru, January, 2009
Round Robin done for limits (Certificates): Yes.
Frequency Certified Reference Material: as above.
Preparation Duplicate Frequency: 1 in 30. Au, Ag only for geology.
Pulp Duplicates Frequency: 1 in 30. Au, Ag only.
Blanks in: Prep Frequency: 1 in a batch.
Analytical Frequency: 1 in a batch.
QC Manager and Chain of QC Command: Full time QC manager (Rafael). All

examination done by hand with Excel. Must re-enter data manually. This is a waste of
time and a possible source of error.
Type of Internal Rules for QC:
Standard Failures: >3 SD is failure in accuracy. 2 in a row >2 SD on the same side of
mean is failure in bias.
Prep. Blank Failures: Ag, 2 g/t, Au, > 0.25 g/t. Redo batch if this occurs.
Analytical Blank Failures: 5 x Lower detection limit
Treatment of Duplicates: run a percentage limit of difference. Geologists don’t

understand the use pf duplicates.
Precision Calculations: no.
Bias Monitoring: Yes, on standards only.
QC Charts for Each Standard and Element: Yes.

Short Term: Yes.
Long Term: Yes.
ISO Certified (Level): in progress.

Pulp and Reject Storage: Not seen.
Organization:
Reporting
LIMS: None.
____________________________________________________ 72
Peru, January, 2009
Database type: Excel only.
Autofax or E-mail: yes, in Excel and csv. Geology has own software.
Standard Reporting Format: Yes.

Custom Reporting Format:
Report all internal QC to client: Yes.
Billing: n/a
Personnel
Total: 23
Number of Shifts: 2 shifts/day, 1 rotation out.
Samples per Day: 270/day; 20 specials geology/d, 110 geology/day, 100 from
plant/day, 40/d for rest.
Determinations per Day: about 1000/day
____________________________________________________ 73
Peru, January, 2009
Standards Submitted
Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.40 +0.50 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 1.71 ± 0.14 1.63 -1.14 3
ARS-3 SE-2 0.242 ± 0.018 0.240 -0.22 4
Total Points 11/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 73.64 -0.07 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 83.6 ± 6.6 89.47 +1.78 2
ARS-3 SE-2 354 ± 21.0 349.89 -0.42 4
Total Points 10/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.762 +0.26 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 0.94 ± 0.07 0.969 +0.83 4
ARS-3 SE-2 0.049 ± 0.003 0.049 0.0 4
Total Points 12/12

Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.732 -0.13 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 1.93 ± 0.16 1.977 +0.59 4
ARS-3 SE-2 1.43 ± 0.11 1.287 -2.60 1
Total Points 9/12
Sample
ARS-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.478 -0.05 4
ARS-2 FMC-1 0.51 ± 0.06 0.526 +0.53 4
ARS-3 SE-2 0.957 ± 0.044 0.947 -0.45 4
Total Points 12/12
Total Points and Percentage: 54/60 or 90 %
____________________________________________________ 74
Peru, January, 2009
Photos
Photo 2: Dryer and preparation room. All Photo 2: New dryer being installed.
clean and well organized.
Photo 4: Pulverizer bench. Lab should be

using B1000 bowls for a larger pulp.
Photo 3: Terminator in a dust

surround. All in good
condition.
Photo 5: Fire assay samples weighed on a

4 place balance. No instruments are
connected to a LIMS.
____________________________________________________ 75
Peru, January, 2009
Photo 7: Fire assay area needs ventilation

for cupels and prill picking area. Better
lighting needed in room.
Photo 6: All standards should

be certified for base metals.
Photo 8: Hot plate temperatures Photo 9: Older AAS used for CN

monitored but need a method of evening solutions. If a LIMS is installed this will
out temperatures across the plate. A sand have to be replaced.
bath does a good job on this.
____________________________________________________ 76
Peru, January, 2009
Appendix 4
Selene Laboratory Audit Form
____________________________________________________ 77
Peru, January, 2009
Laboratory Name: Explorador (Selene) Mine Lab, (Operated by SGS)
Address:
Phone: 01 317 2000 ext. 3256
Fax:
E-Mail: maximo.mendoza@hoplc.com
Manager: Maximo Mendoza, Deggi Ailas Polomino QC Manager

Single building near plant. Contains all sample prep, fire assay and offices. Re-
designed since last visit.

Sorting Tables or Space: Samples laid on sorting table and compared to sample
submission sheets. Any errors are corrected with client.
Work Order Book: Sample shipments placed into Excel and QC inserted into worksheets.
Use sequential numbers for work order to track samples.
Computer Entry (LIMS): no LIMS. Excel only and does not print labels.
Sample Preparation:
Size of Room: Two rooms with driers and crushers in one, pulverizers in other, good
sample flow.
Drying Facilities and Capacity: - 2 x Essa electric dryers with trolleys. 250 sample
capacity. Have a separate smaller dryer for plant samples in pulverizer room.
Temperature control: yes, digital readout set at 125 C. for geology.
Type of drying pans: stainless steel and paper lined between samples. Only one ticket
submitted by client.
Jaws or crushers: 1 x TM Rhino primary and 1 x TM Terminator secondary. In good
condition.
(dust control): In a surrounding box, good ventilation. No grease on pans.
Rolls crushers: No.
Other crushers: No.
Pulverizers: 2 x LM-2 with small bowls, in good condition.
____________________________________________________ 78
Peru, January, 2009
(dust control): in dust hoods with good suction.
Splitters: 1 large riffle with stainless steel catch pans, in good condition. Should take a
500 g split and use larger B1000 pulverizer bowls.
Work Bench: (type, dust control): Dust control for splitter needs to be installed.
Cleaning Material for Jaw and Pulverizer(type and location): coarse quartz near
crushers and quartz sand near pulverizers.
Frequency and Use: crushers use quartz every 10 samples, and pulverizer between
each sample.
Dust Control Outlet: outside to filters.
Type of Pulp Bags: kraft paper.

Type of Reject Bags: plastic.
Air Hoses and Compressor: hoses at each station, two compressors out back.
Frequency of Bleeding of Water: twice per day.
Number and location of filters: filter on each compressor.
Prep QC Methods:
Frequency of Prep Dups: 1 in 48
Frequency of Screen Tests: Coarse Reject: 3 in 48
Pulp: 3 in 48
QC Book for Prep: yes.
QC Limits for crush: 85 % -2mm; need to level QC balance.
QC Limits for pulp: 90 % -200 mesh
QC Plotted: yes and displayed on wall of lab.
Geological Blank Analyzed from Sample Prep: yes, 1 in 48.
Method of handling client’s standards: Standards travel with samples.
Can make standards?: no.
____________________________________________________ 79
Peru, January, 2009
Sample Balance (LIMS): Fire Assay: 4 place balance, weight to 2 places, 30 g for
geology.
Geochem and Wet Assay: 4 place balance, 0.5 g.
Micro Balance (LIMS): Mettler UM x 2, calibrated.
Sealed Room: Fire Assay: yes.

Wet Assay: yes.
Balance Tables: Fire Assay: yes.

Wet Assay: yes.
Frequency of Calibration: 2 x per day. 3 weights; 10, 20, 50 g for FA. AAS does .1, .1,
.5 and 1 g.
In-house with book: Yes. Book must be kept current.
External with certificate: yes, 1 x per year, and maintenance 2 x per year.

Overall Description of Room: Small fire assay room.
Batch size: 48
(mix clients in batches?), No.
Flux Formula: Geology: 48 % PbO, 34.5 % soda, 15 % borax, 2.5 % silica.

Concentrate: 61.25 % PbO, 20 % soda, 15 % borax, 3.75 % silica.
Source of litharge: Not sure.
Amount of Flux added to 30 g sample: 160 g, or 70 g of Pb.
Flux Mixing System: Placed into plastic bags and shaken by hand.
Method of Inquart: not required.
Fusion Furnaces: 1 x diesel furnace.

Time of fusion: 1 hour.
Cupel Furnaces: 2 x electric furnaces.

Time of cupellation: 45-50 minutes.
____________________________________________________ 80
Peru, January, 2009
Size range of Pb button: 20-45 g, with all buttons weighed.
Usual color of slag (from used fusion pots): green.
Method of breaking and cleanliness of button: on anvil and buttons are clean.
Method of Order Control: in templates and numbered crucibles.
Ventilation and Safety: - Good, but prills should be picked in the fire assay lab.
Reject level for Crucibles (ppb): - Used one time only.
Wet Laboratory
Size: small single room, not much space to expand if required.
Number of Fume Hoods: 3 hoods, 1 for acids, 1 for gravimetric, and 1 for acid
digestion.
Balanced Airflow: door was closed but negative pressure in room.
Separation of geochem and assay?: No. One area for grav and one for wet assay in
same room.
Hot Plates: 2 for grav. 15 % HNO3 for 20-30 minutes then add conc. acid.
Temp. controlled: 130 C for grav using IR gun over 9 points of measurement.
Done weekly. Two plates for wet assay at 250 C with digital control, but needs to be
calibrated.
Batch size for geochem: 30.
Batch size for wet assay: 30. 5 ml HCl, 10 ml HNO3, 3 drops of HF.
Cleanliness: Good.
Distilled Water Source: Barnstead still.

Measure conductivity: Yes, and readings placed into book.
Teflonware: no.
Fusion Furnaces: no.
Calibration of Auto Pipettes: yes, but only use water. Need density of acids and done
each day.
Recorded for inspection: Yes, but need to use actual acids and density of each
acid.
____________________________________________________ 81
Peru, January, 2009
Glassware (calibrated?): yes, into 100 ml flasks.
Sealed acid tubes?: Yes.
Elements Analyzed: Cu, Pb, Zn, Fe, Ag, Au.
Separate Room: yes.
Make and Model AAS: 1 x Varian AA240.
Dedicated AAS (Elements Analyzed): does all elements.
ICP-ES: no.
ICP-MS: no.
Other Instruments (Leco, XRF): no.
Storage of Calibration Standards (Names and Dates): Done every week from Merck
stock. Named and dated and signed.
Cross reference new with old AAS and ICP standards: Yes, but must pay attention to
limits and keep within limits.
Recorded in book?: Yes, but should change book to show when new standards are
being used.

Au Fire Assay Standard Frequency: 2 in 48
Au Fire Assay Standard Range (type and certified): use Selene standards.
Base Metals Standard Frequency: 1/30, only have CDN FCM-5.
Base Metals Standard Assay Range (type and certified): Cu: 0.419 %
Pb: 0.175 %
Zn: 0.645 %
Ag: 28.4 %
Selene must certify their internal standards for base metals.
Round Robin done for limits (Certificates): yes.
____________________________________________________ 82
Peru, January, 2009
Frequency Certified Reference Material: as above.
Preparation Duplicate Frequency: 1 in 48
Pulp Duplicates Frequency: 1 in 48
Blanks in: Prep Frequency: 1 in 48
Analytical Frequency: 1 in 48
QC Manager and Chain of QC Command: Full time QC manager, night shift must
send data to QC Manager in the morning not to the client.
Type of Internal Rules for QC: Standard Failures: > 3SD from mean is a failure in
accuracy. Batch is repeated. Two in a row > 2SD is failure in bias.
Prep. Blank Failures: Au> 0.3 g/t, Ag > 3 g/t
Analytical Blank Failures: Au > 0.2 g/t, Ag > 2g/t.
Treatment of Duplicates: > 20 % difference is failure.
Precision Calculations: Yes.
Bias Monitoring: Yes.
QC Charts for Each Standard and Element: Yes, for each month.
Short Term: Yes.
Long Term: not now but will be doing in future.
ISO Certified (Level): Working on 17025.

Pulp and Reject Storage: not seen.
Organization:
Reporting
LIMS: no LIMS, only Excel.
Database type: Excel only.
Autofax or E-mail: email to clients.
Standard Reporting Format: plant is fixed format, geology uses data base and imports
data.
____________________________________________________ 83
Peru, January, 2009
Custom Reporting Format: No.
Report all internal QC to client: Send weekly reports.
Billing: n/a
Personnel
Total: 30.
Number of Shifts: 2/day and a swing shift.
Samples per Day: about 250/day
Determinations per Day: About 530/d
____________________________________________________ 84
Peru, January, 2009
Standards Submitted
Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 1.37 ± 0.12 1.42 +0.83 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 1.71 ± 0.14 1.72 +0.14 4
SEL-3 SE-1 0.480 ± 0.034 0.48 0.0 4
Total Points 12/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 73.9 ± 7.3 73.37 -0.15 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 83.6 ± 6.6 85.85 +0.68 4
SEL-3 SE-1 712 ± 57 710.67 -0.05 4
Total Points 12/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 0.756 ± 0.046 0.74 -0.69 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 0.94 ± 0.07 0.95 +0.29 4
SEL-3 SE-1 0.097 ± 0.005 0.10 +1.20 3
Total Points 11/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 1.739 ± 0.104 1.72 -0.37 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 1.93 ± 0.16 1.84 -1.13 3
SEL-3 SE-1 2.65 ± 0.20 2.58 -0.70 4
Total Points 11/12

Sample
SEL-1 FCM-2 0.479 ± 0.038 0.49 +0.58 4
SEL-2 FMC-1 0.51 ± 0.06 0.53 +0.67 4
SEL-3 SE-1 1.92 ± 0.09 1.89 -0.67 4
Total Points 12/12
____________________________________________________ 85
Peru, January, 2009
Photos
Photo 3: Two dryers use trolleys and Photo 2: Crusher enclosures would be
stainless steel pans that are lined with more efficient with doors. Dust control is
paper between samples. required for splitters.
Photo 4: Pulverizers are clean but should

be using a B1000 bowl size.
Photo 3: Compressor has

filter and bleed valve for
water.
Photo 6: Hot plates are monitored with IR

gun, but should be calibrated to controllers.
Photo 5: Fire floor. Prills should be

picked on floor and not in another room.
____________________________________________________ 86
Peru, January, 2009
Photo 7: Standard should be certified for Photo 8: Absorbance limits for newly
base metals. made standards should be followed.
____________________________________________________ 87

Auditoria Informe Barry Smee2009

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Auditoria Informe Barry Smee2009

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

A Review of the Arcata, Ares

and Selene Mine Laboratories

Hochschild Mining plc

I have included a Laboratory Guideline in Appendix 1. This Guideline summarizes the

2. Brief Regulatory Overview

3. Quality Control Overview

3.1 Quality Control Procedures

These composites should be forwarded to a laboratory specializing in the preparation of

Standards must be packaged either in 1 kg, vacuum-packed and heat-sealed plastic or

Many companies routinely submit a sub-sample of pulp or reject to a second laboratory,

All on-going quality control data can be

time assessment of data.

Senior management must support quality control in mineral exploration. A series of

4. Results of Laboratory Audits

4.1 Arcata Mine Laboratory

Total Points 16/16

Total Points 16/16

Total Points 14/16

Total Points 13/16

Total Points 16/16

Total Points and Percentage: 75/80 or 93.8 %

4.1.1 Arcata Laboratory Recommendations

4.2 Ares Mine Laboratory

Total Points 11/12

Total Points 10/12

Total Points 12/12

Total Points 9/12

Total Points 12/12

Total Points and Percentage: 54/60 or 90 %

4.3 Selene Mine Laboratory

Total Points 12/12

Total Points 12/12

Total Points 11/12

Total Points 11/12

Total Points 12/12

Total Points and Percentage: 58/60 or 96.7 %

4.3.1 Selene Recommendations

Respectfully Submitted by:

Barry W. Smee, Ph.D., P.Geo.

Smee, B.W., 1998: Overview of quality control procedures required by mineral

Submitted on February 10, 2009 in electronic format only,

Barry W. Smee, Ph.D., P.Geo.

Laboratory Audit Guideline and Best Practices

1. Laboratory Audit Overview

An analytical laboratory is the heart of a resource delineation program. All economic

1.1 Sample Receiving and Sorting

A spotless sample preparation laboratory. equipment. An example of a clean sample

All samples submitted to a laboratory should first be dried as a standard protocol. No

Dryers should not have a single point

The riffle splitters should be made of smooth

It is essential to clean the Pb buttons of slag completely. This is usually done by

A foolproof method of keeping track of sample order and of crucibles should be an

Auto-pipettes that quickly dispense acids to tubes or beakers should be calibrated by

All acid-filled containers such as test tubes or

As previously mentioned, laboratories should routinely use both preparation and

Barry W. Smee, Ph.D., P.Geo.

Over All Building Description:

Sample Receiving and Sorting:

Work Order Book:

Drying Facilities and Capacity: -

Type of drying pans:

Pulverizers: - (make, dust control):

Work Bench: (type, dust control):

Cleaning Material for Jaw and Pulverizer: -