© 2024 Alpha Spread Limited. All Rights Reserved.
www.alphaspread.com is not operated by a broker, a dealer, or a registered investment adviser. Under no circumstances does any information posted on www.alphaspread.com represent a recommendation to buy or sell a security. The information on this site, and in its related newsletters, is not intended to be, nor does it constitute, investment advice or recommendations. The information on this site is in no way guaranteed for completeness, accuracy or in any other way. In no event shall Alpha Spread Limited be liable to any member, guest or third party for any damages of any kind arising out of the use of any content or other material published or available on www.alphaspread.com, or relating to the use of, or inability to use, www.alphaspread.com or any content, including, without limitation, any investment losses, lost profits, lost opportunity, special, incidental, indirect, consequential or punitive damages. Past performance is a poor indicator of future performance.
You don't have any saved screeners yet
Intrinsic Value is all-important and is the only logical way to evaluate the relative attractiveness of investments and businesses.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the briefing on Q2 December Financial Year 2020 Results Call. [Operator Instruction] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.I will now hand the conference over to your first speaker, Mr. Bob Vassie. Thank you. Please go ahead.
Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Thanks for joining us for St Barbara's December 2019 quarterly report briefing. On the call with me today are Maryse Bélanger, President of the Americas. She is over in Canada at the moment in Arlington. With me here, we have Rowan Cole, as usual, Company Secretary. Lucas Welsh, GM, Finance and Procurement. I should mention that Garth, our CFO, is currently on leave. We also have David Cotterell, Manager Investor Relations, and I believe we have Stean Barrie, GM of Leonora on the call as well and potentially, Tim Richards who is now GM Technical Services, including looking after the Simberi Sulphide Project. Some people will know, Tim has been the very successful General Manager at Simberi through the turnaround there for 6 years. He's now coming to a corporate role with us, and we've been pleased to be able to replace them with Jason Robertson, who used to run the plant next door at Lihir. So that's all been going on in the background for the last quarter and has transitioned. Overall, the developer -- the December quarter was an improvement compared to the September quarter, with production increasing 8% and all-in sustaining costs increasing 4%. Atlantic had an outstanding quarter with record production driven by increase in metal throughput and grade. The Gwalia Extension Project is nearing completion with the PAF circuit completed, commissioned and now operating, and I'm very pleased about that as you probably would know. The major surface infrastructure is completed and the surface fans are now operating, delivering air into the mine. This combined with water and cooling circuits is really helping us out. We're already seeing the benefits of that in mining performance. However, the final ventilation raisebore, which is the -- for those that know the underground raisebore about 450 meters of [indiscernible] meter raisebore, down off to the side of the ore body. It's experiencing a bit of challenging ground conditions, we should be through that soon, but knowing the rocks that we're encountering for the rest the way out, we expect that last aspect of, in fact, the only outstanding aspect of GEP to be completed in April. Once we get through the harvest that will be able to forecast that very accurately. This today and completing the final raisebore has impacted the forecast development rates for the second half and results in the delay in returning to the higher grade areas in the center of the ore body until the end of the financial year. We'll be close to what we previously planned, but given the uncertainties in raiseboring and what actual development rates we can attain with the partial vent that we have already delivered and then the full vent, it's prudent to adjust our guidance. We now expect production between 170,000 and 180,000 ounces at all-in sustaining between AUD 1,470 per ounce and AUD 1,540 per ounce. At Simberi, production for the quarter was lower than forecast due to less tonnes realized from pioneering into the new Botlu open pit, which meant an increase in processing of lower-grade stockpiles. We have reforecast guidance on and now expect production between 105,000 ounces and 115,000 ounces and all-in sustaining cost of between AUD 1,500 per ounce and AUD 1,645 per ounce. The very encouraging news is that the recently completed sulfides drilling program at Sorowar has revealed significant additional oxides as well as sulfides. These oxides are in the sulfide shell. This, along with the gold price environment, is making our sulfides project look very much better. We are working on new resources and reserves and have to release those next month at the half year results, along with a directional decision on the project. Just to highlight slide on Slide 4. I've covered most of that. The interesting to see operations at Leonora and Simberi achieving production milestones there. We had strong cash contribution from operations of AUD 66 million for the quarter. We also consolidated the undrawn debt facility with the existing CAD 100 million debt that we had from Atlantic, which has reduced our interest expense by AUD 1.6 million per year. I'm particularly pleased that we are now running PAF and getting much more air into the mine. It's already making a difference. Our breadth pipeline is now very strong and we're investing more in the exploration. Just also pleased to see Slides 5. I've been talking about safety in the last few quarters and we're starting to turn the corner. These numbers for total recordable injury frequency right now include Atlantic Gold numbers and Atlantic's statistics have improved over the last year as well. So we've been doing a lot of work on safety, leadership and we'll continue to focus on improving our input. Slide 6 shows the consolidated position. Slide 7, Gwalia's quarterly result, which has been in the last quarter. Ore mined, in fact, was the best since June quarter financial year '18, some positive sign. Slide 8, I've covered Gwalia's guidance already. As you might expect, I wasn't necessarily keen to adjust guidance because with PAF now working and more ventilation than the mine already, we're seeing some signs of better improved -- better performance. The issue is getting that last underground shaft complete and that's something I'll be focused on as I hand over to make that -- given that last shaft complete mix, everything we're doing more effective and efficient and a sequence-driven because we have been in the outer part of the ore body and we get back into the center towards the end of the financial year. So it's very tight whether we get some of that high-grade stuff in the financial year or how much should we get off it. It's very sensitive to the development rates. Rates that have been proving. We'll be trying hard to achieve what we had planned. Just to put a update on the raisebore, now we've sort of -- we've done the 2 5-meter surface shaft so that were 926 meters each. We've done the 1 underground, 400-odd meter shaft. And with the last shaft is about 450 meters. I think we're up about 60 meters. We've hit some pillow basalt, just break out of the face and cause us grief. But we think we're only about a couple of meters away from getting through that area. And we have a diamond drill hole right through the gaps of thing, so we know the rocks are going to account the rest of the way, which we know are better. So we're focusing on that in the coming days. Looking at Slide 9, I'm very pleased to see that we maintain total material movement of almost 1.1 million tonnes per year without ventilation and now PAF -- and now we have ventilation and the PAF is operational. We'll be aiming to keep as much waste underground as possible. Gwalia extension on Slide 10, as mentioned earlier, GEP surface infrastructure is complete and we're delivering additional air underground, with ventilation increasing from 450 cubic meters that we've had over this last period of being restricted, 450 cubic meters per second is now up to 700 meters cube per second. Once we complete the final raisebore, we'll get the full benefit of 900 meters. Now, I should point out the surface infrastructure that's completed was not insignificant and included a big power station extension, 3 new fans, chillers, water, borefield infrastructure, water RO plants, all that stuff has gone through fairly well, as have 3 of the 4 shafts. So it was, as I said, we're seeing the benefits of that already. Moving on to Simberi at Slide 11. Simberi had a lower quarter with the performance of the remaining oxide areas and performing on tonnage and to a [indiscernible] grade to varying degrees. Botlu especially underperformed versus expectation in grade and tonnage. The shallower areas of oxide pits can do that. There's some areas those of you who recall, our Pigibow mining area, will remember. They tend to come right in our performance, you get deeper, but Botlu was smaller and shallower pit that transitions into sulfide relatively quickly. Unfortunately, we've had to revise our expectations slightly for the remainder of the year. We don't expect Simberi to beat the expectations significantly as it's done over the last 4 years. And that's as we deplete the pit oxide areas. With feed from the mine down, we end up processing a lot of stockpiles, and these are lower grade than mine feed. So that drops the overall grade. We've also, as we said last quarter, been changing out much of the area of rope conveyor belt, we did 1,500 meters in Q2 with a further 1,500 meters planned this coming quarter. We needed to bring that forward and we bring that shut forward due to the [ remaining well ] condition, we stopped the Ropecon with a specialist arriving this week to get started on that, just bring that forward to make sure we don't lose the belt. We've made significant investments here, you might recall that we totally overhauled and replaced the suspension cables at the Ropecon. We've been replacing belts, as I just mentioned. We've just installed a new scrubber and the ball mill circuit, and that's going pretty well. We've got a new pebble crusher on-site where we have run with the pebble crusher. So we've got the circuit for it. We're just about to install it. And that will help us maintain good throughput whatever the harder ore as we encountered deeper in the pits and then the transitional areas. Transitional areas can be harder. They can be higher grade and lower recovery, so they can be with mining. We have another great set of exploration results to report from -- showing at Sorowar Pit, more about that shortly. Atlantic Gold, Slide 12. Record production quarter and that was a winter quarter. The trend here is good with improved production costs, all signs of the workforce we have here who are getting on top of maintenance and implementing a pretty impressive data collection and business improvement process. We have successfully tried some larger grinding media in the mill and improved reliability through the crushing circuit, all improving throughput. I've been impressed by the team's handling of winter conditions by learning from the last winter and implementing modifications and procedures for winterization. Q3 coming up has probably the 2 worst winter months, but as I said, we're better prepared. We've provided growth capital [indiscernible] for the trial for the first time for Atlantic. This is the money we're spending on the various studies of 3 new mines. So it's a fair spend, but there's 3 studies together where all permitting activities or geo-tech drilling or forestry roadwork, all piled into that guidance on growth capital for Atlantic. Cash balance. Slide 13 shows the change in net cash balance, which has improved slightly due to better production quarter overall versus growth and exploration spending of AUD 15 million and AUD 10 million, respectively. Obviously, we are spending a lot on our future, and we are generating the cash to do that. Cash contribution from operations was strong at AUD 66 million for the quarter. Exploration. There's a fair bit in the quarterly about this. I'll try not to spend too much time at this point on it and get to questions, but we had a pretty good quarter in exploration with the best results from the final Simberi sulfide drilling campaign and results of the Atlantic. Gwalia is transitioning from emphasis on extending our knowledge of deeps that we won't get to for some years to filling up the mill in the near to medium term. The Greater Gwalia area is very mature with a number of historical open pits and with the high gold prices and spare mill capacity, we're dusting off a few of these, including Tower Hill. There are some smaller open pits or near-surface deposits that haven't been mined that may be able to assist us in the medium term. We're looking at them pretty hard and we're also looking at the capital toll treatment options. We had -- we did toll treatment at the end of last financial year. So we're well set up for that. In the medium term, in the Greater Gwalia and further north of Horse Paddock Well, we have some quite interesting but deeper prospects, and you can see the current results from these on Slide 28 in the appendix. Simberi exploration that I've mentioned, there's some slides on Slide 15 with 2 sections there. All 4 sections are in the full report as well as 6 detailing 69 more holes with the bunch of holes over the last year and a bit there. These have been very encouraging. The updated Simberi resources and reserves statement is due this coming quarter and as well as our decision on proceeding to full feasibility on the Sulphide Project. Like I said, pleasingly, we've got oxides -- more oxides that are coming from that drilling. They are in the shell that we would develop to if we're doing the Sulphide Project. But we are looking at whether we just bridge over to exit some of that, before a decision or whatever, but it's pleasing to have because it allow us to keep feeding the mill whilst building any sulphide plant. Nova Scotia, Slide 16. I should just point out, we've got a 3-phase strategy here. We absolutely want to drill in around the existing planned mines being Touqouy where we're operating now, Beaver Dam, Fifteen Mile Stream, Cochrane Hill, but we also want to drill in between those, because anything we find in between those will be proximate to a plant. So that's the second phase of -- or second form of exploration. And then, of course, there's more Greenfield stuff. And I'm very pleased that we've gone way over to the other side of Halifax in the southwest of Nova Scotia and started with Beaver, Wisconsin and very encouraging Arial geophysics results to starting to drilling and just getting some results and now that show a nominal scale. So we're pretty encouraged by that. You can see some results here from Fifteen Mile Stream. We will have ongoing campaigns of 149 Deposit to the east of the planned pit and at Seloam Brook, a possible extension of the actual Fifteen Mile Stream pit. Both will continue to get great results and should feed -- and that should feed into resources and reserves and mine planning in the future. Pleasantfield, Slide 17, which is this new area outside of the Moose River Corridor, Greenfields area for us. It's got some cover. So it hadn't been mined by the old-timers. And we've just started to drill there and awaiting the results. So we've got some early results in the quarterly that show there is gold that we're starting to hit. That's very encouraging for us. Slides 18 and 19, I won't delve on it, the strategy and growth pipeline that you've seen before. So in conclusion, so we can get to the questions. It's an improved quarter and we've had a great operational result of Atlantic. It's very pleasing to see that asset delivering well, indeed, standing out, immediately after such a significant M&A transaction for us. We do not have to experience to draw knocked out turnaround period and we have not had to send anyone to show them what to do. So it just really tick the boxes on our strategy. Thankfully, we have past keeping waste underground at Gwalia and we'll be ramping that up. And we've turned on some wind earlier than planned and that's making a real difference. I'm very positive about the potential to extend Simberi through sulfides and bridge that with more oxides that were found, more about that in this coming quarter. Cash contribution from operations is strong. While we've had to revise our guidance at Gwalia and Simberi, we're seeing positive signs of both operations and we'll be trying to exceed the expectations in the remaining half. That's a job I am setting up for Craig Jetson as he comes in. So this is my 21st and last quarterly. I hand over soon on the 3rd of February and will be around till the end of March, as I said last month. I'll use that time to focus on the last shaft and get direction for Simberi and also complete the Atlantic integration, all 3 of these things are well in hand. So thanks, everyone. And with that, I'll now take questions.
[Operator Instruction] And your first question today comes from David Radclyffe from Global Mining.
I've got a couple of questions. Maybe if we could just start at Gwalia and trying to understand how the PAF is actually going. So what percentage of -- or proportion of waste is currently being used in PAF. I mean it looks like the waste movement was down sort of circa 15,000 tonnes and that meant that the overall haulage was up a similar amount. Is that the impact of PAF we're seeing there? And what's sort of the ultimate tonnage that of waste material that PAF will consume?
Okay. So I'll just headline that and I'll -- look, the first thing to say is that we've only just tended on, right? So what we've tended on and what we're doing is we are stepping up the amount of aggregate waste, crushed waste that we feed into the mix. So it's mostly pace with a bit of aggregate and then we ramp up the aggregate to the maximum allowable for the sort of concrete we're making for the strength we need in the stopes. So that's a ramp-up of blend. And then following that, there's a ramp-up of how much we use as we bid the system. And now it is predicated, I think the PAF systems only -- it doesn't run 24/7, that's only about 25% utilized. And that's because we don't always have stopes available to fill. And if we have a problem with the plant, when we are filling, we just turn the valve and fill it with paste. But we won't be able to get 100% of all waste generated into stopes, and that's purely because it's sequence orientated. You may not have a place to put a stope to fill in the sequence, and you may have filled up your silo full of waste and therefore, you will have to take some to surface. But -- so it's early days at the moment. We are targeting getting -- very shortly getting the maximum mix and then we'll be ramping up to about towards 50% of waste staying underground as the medium target. I might just hand over to Stean to add any comment to that. If Stean is on the line.
Bob, you basically covered up most of the basis. We're currently adding about 30% of aggregate into the PAF mix, which we have steadily increased from the 10% on which it was commissioned. And as you rightly state, the intent is to move in the short-term to 50% of waste with the ultimate goal moving closer to 75%, which would be an ideal outcome for us.
And what's the maximum -- so we'll move towards 50% than 75% of waste staying underground, but what's the maximum percentage of aggregate and the paste aggregate fill waste? It's not half-half, is it? It's...
It -- look, it is 50%. That was the design specifications. Ultimately, that number will be defined through the UCAs and flowability work that we do on-site. So that is a benchmark that's been set for us, it is for us to now prove how accurate that number is.
Then maybe as a follow-up, the slide -- the delay, obviously, to GEP and you talk about the impact of the mining sequence. Is there a knock-on effect into the next financial year? And does that put pressure on the 230,000 ounce sort of target you had floated? Or is there still some fact, you think, in that target?
It hasn't knocked on to the 230,000 ounce. We still think that's fine and really with how well we go was just on what our ultimate development rates end up with because right now, we're in a transition as that we have actually been able to increase our development rates just through continuous improvement and focusing on the work of project Excalibur, which was making us ready for ventilation. So that when the ventilation arrive, we weren't thinking about how to improve. We were knowing how to do it. We're seeing benefits from that already. Now we have a partial ventilation's solution that started around Christmas time, and we've gone up from 450 to 700 that's very significant. That does help us. But this last shaft section really helps us get a lot of volume or a lot more volume to the deeper parts of the mine. And that's why, I've sort of looked at the development rates and thought, well, if we peer back our development rates a bit, we would still end up back in the high-grade sequence of the ore body towards the financial year, but it really depends on when this last shaft comes in and how quickly we react in those development rates. So we're being prudent on that, but once we're back into the sequence, as said, we were experiencing that ramp-up of development rates through this last part of the financial year. But then we have them for the next financial year. What we've got to do is work out what they are, have we gone from 350 meters a month to 630 meters. And then do we get beyond that? And one thing that -- should that be a pain to point out is that the development rates are great with ventilation, but as I've said before, you can't have one jumbo behind the other. You've got to have a number of headings to work in. And to that end, we're working on a couple of things. We need to get the [indiscernible], which is the second decline we've gone to double decline. We need to get that down into the right area. We need to then be establishing the new working level. So that gives us a number of faces to drill and we also have already gone back into West Lode, which is something I've been talking about, which gives us more faces to work, but also would allow us to develop stopes to go to, if we get tied on others, as you've experienced -- as we've experienced and this has been well, but that's just sort of ongoing adjustments to guidance is because we have a bit of a problem, we've got nowhere to go. So really, we're starting to tighten up other areas. We've got the ventilation coming in. So the whole transition happens in this financial year and we still have a very positive outlook for the next.
Okay. And maybe just once quick last one. What are you kind of your initial thoughts here as an alternative water-source at Cochrane Hill if it is designated a wellness area? Obviously, it's some time out, but is this material?
Look, we're looking at that. That just came out. I think we mentioned in the quarterly that the Nova Scotian government has put up a few areas potentially for protected areas. Archibald Lake didn't make the cut when they did it last time. It is on the list now, but there is a consultation period where -- which we would say, look, this is our plan for Cochrane Hill and how we treat that catchment area. So that engagement has started. The only thing I would say is that Canada and especially Nova Scotia is a land of lakes. So there's plenty of water. So the team would look at alternative water sources. We can look at alternative ways to process or locations to process. But really, this is our preferred option. So we'll heavily engaging with the local government there. We've got a lot of support for -- local support for employment in the area. And we've got a track record of being able to mine and not cause impact on the water environment. So we'll be using those 2 things in our discussions with the government.
Your next question comes from the line of Michael Slifirski from Crédit Suisse.
Congratulations again on your time, congratulations on 21 quarters. And as a shareholder, I guess, we'll hear you dialing in, in future. So I hope to continue hearing your voice. A few quick questions. First of all, with the Paf plant itself, how is it performing? Is it performing as was expected? Have you come across any design issues or performance issues compared to what was expected? Or is it just too early to actually understand the performance compared to those design parameters?
Look, it's a good question. As you know, the whole plant was a bit delayed. We had problems getting the power hole down to it, difficulty getting the work done underground. But -- and we made it a much more substantial and maintainable plant than we had initially planned. I think I've covered that before, but at the moment, it's a pretty simple plant in real terms. We've just got 2-stage crushing and that's meeting the expectations. We've got a silo in between the 2 levels, which is -- that we draw from. And then we've got this big and power mixer, which -- one of the delays we had was just getting that thing to start. You just got the electric to just pull the amps to get this big paddle of -- going around with the pace and the rock. So that's now going. I think the biggest complexity is these positive displacement pumps. They are brutal. They just pump concrete in aggregate over a long period. There's a lot of software that goes and a lot of hydraulic systems to make those things work. And we had teething problems commissioning it, but when it's running, it's brutal. So it really pumps that stuff. So I think from a design criteria and the fact that we improved this design as we built it and the throughput and capacity and pressure, it is meeting the expectations. What we've got to do is iron out a few post-commissioning issues, we've got -- we're probably going to under warranty, replace the grizzly on the primary crusher. That's not too much of a problem. We've got to work around for that now and then we'll replace it. And then it's just learning how best to make sure we've got the software elements of those hydraulic systems running on the positive displacement pumps. So it's about getting through the post-commissioning issues. As I said, it's not a high-utilization piece of kit. So that helps us ramping up the amount of mix and then the amount that we use it. But capacity-wise, design-wise, it's as intended.
Terrific. Secondly, with respect to Simberi, I think you said with the full year results, you'll have the revised reserve, resource and decision to proceed or otherwise to feasibility, the feasibility study, how long will that take to complete and at the end of the feasibility, what's your sort of view of construction time and first production beyond that?
Yes. No, probably the best way to look at that is we had an existing pre-feasibility study. So what we're doing with this drill out of Sorowar is just updating that. And when we look at feasibility, what we're looking at here is not a feasibility on an airport and crushing and a mine and a Ropecon, all that we've already gotten and know-how to -- so the feasibility angle is just running the pit shells off the new resources and reserves, which we've already had a go at. So the time rate step on the feasibility study is actually just getting the flotation and con handling worked out. Now we've done some trade-off studies on con handling. So we're pretty much settled on what we want to do there, which is largely just barging it out to a boat rather than investing an expensive sort of port facilities or anything. And if locations is going to be pretty much off the shelf. It's just -- and the circuit's already been designed in the most recent update to pre-feasibility. So I'm thinking, roughly, if we make a directional decision into February or in March that we could pull the feasibility together by the end of the calendar year. The -- building it after that is -- would really depend on refining the feasibility. But the one thing I would say is that the additional oxides that we're seeing in the extended pit shell of the Sorowar mine and bearing in mind, there's oxides in the Pigiput mines as well. Now if you recall, the last period PFS, we essentially mined the sulfide pit shell at Pigiput, there wasn't anything really at Sorowar. And in the oxides we encountered, we stockpiled for processing at the end of the life. What we're seeing here is the contribution of oxides in the sulfide shell at Sorowar are going to be coming in pretty early in the sequence. So what we are able to do is use that to keep processing through the CIL plant while we would be building the sulfide. So I was particularly pleased to see that extra oxides coming in. But we want to just finish this modeling off before we say much more than that.
Yes. That's what I was trying to get to. My next question was with those additional oxides, do you now see low-risk of a production hiatus between depletion of existing oxides. And commencement of sulfides? Or is -- how you're actually seeing that? Is there -- the Sorowar oxides, are they sufficiently substantial that if there is a decision to proceed. You get a sufficient breathing space?
Look, we've got to win phase of modeling this out now and doing the resource and reserves, which aren't far away because I'll have them in the half. They are both significant.
Yes. Okay. The Gwalia exploration for satellite pits, potentially other sources of feed for the mill. Has there been anything sort of substantial from that initial work that's given you encouragement?
One of the -- yes. And I think you've seen Tower Hill there. You know Tower Hill is stone's throw away from Gwalia. It's full of water, but -- and we like to have that water there, but we can move that to have a light. So we -- we are looking -- what we're looking at there at Tower Hill, especially the gold prices, we'd always sort of contemplated that we go underground that we push the pit. Now pushing the pit, you can -- the ultimate pit would tack out the railway line for the nickel waste there or you could terminate it earlier. But there is a pit there that wouldn't impact that line that we're looking at. So that's encouraging. But what I do like, there is a couple of -- and there'll be probably more about that in the coming quarter. There's some existing, I think, gaps in the graphs, one of them up near towards the King of the Hills that we still own that has a mining lease on it and some -- shallow drill results that show there's good stuff there. I mean, and another undeveloped place around that neck of the woods as well, all showing reasonable volumes of around 3-gram a tonne type of oxides. So these are real potentials. It's just that we don't want to say too much about them until we go back into the historic drilling and look at the -- with ones with already mining leases on them, you've got to still do a plan that works for approvals. So we're brewing that up now and we'll probably say more about that next quarter, but I do like the look of some of these things, especially at the gold price.
Your next question comes from the line of Matthew Frydman from Goldman Sachs.
Sorry, can you hear me?
Yes.
Yes, sorry about that. Look, firstly, on guidance, obviously, pretty disappointing to say the second guidance downgrade in 2 quarters. Clearly now the year fourth quarter weighted. So I guess, just trying to understand your approach to guidance, whether or not you think you've now got a robust buffer at Gwalia. And I guess, whether the range that you've given of 170,000 to 180,000 ounces, whether that's driven by, I guess, the outcome of, whether or not, you access that high-grade material because it does seem like a pretty tight range. You clearly mentioned that you've got a better understanding of the rock types going forward for the raisebore, but you also mentioned that it's pretty tight at the end of the year as to whether you access that high grade. So just wondering how comfortable you are with that buffer?
Yes. Look, I was reasonably comfortable with the last one. And as I said, I wasn't too interesting in changing it. But the reality is, you're going through a real transition to Gwalia. Over the last year, we -- and a bit where we just haven't had ventilation, and it's really hard to predict how -- we can predict our ore body, but having to make choices every day about where you send vents and realizing that you haven't got PAF finished for the raisebore shippings and then you've got to send more vent to the construction of PAF, it's been a very dynamic situation. Had -- we had expected the raisebore to be, sort of, completed around now. And we forecast not too overly aggressive development rates. When you pair them back a bit, you'd still get back into the center of the ore body, but you don't get as much out of it by the 30th of June. So I think there's a reasonable chance that we can get back to where we planned, but in the dynamic environment like that, our approach is always to tell you guys what we're seeing, and that's why we've adjusted it based on that risk.
Sure. I guess maybe following up on that and maybe Stean can help fair a bit as well. But clearly, you guys talked about the ramping up of the PAF to 15%. Is that level of utilization for PAF already factored into your guidance rate forecast? Or do you see upside there? Or is that part of where you could potentially call back some of that gap? And then secondly, similarly, with the additional vent capacity you've got, should we also expect potentially higher total material movement going forward? Is that another avenue to potentially do a little bit better than the rate forecast?
Yes. Look, it's a good question, but it applies in a couple of ways. In the transition now, like PAF firing on all cylinders. If you look at that total material moved graph where we always wanted to get to 1.1 out of the portal but we're at that now really with head -- with a history of limited ventilation and not working PAF. So PAF now working will mean that trucks carrying waste can now truck ore out. So that's going to help out total capacity. Having ventilation is -- we've got enough ventilation for the -- in fact, we're using the decline for ventilation. So we -- that's -- where that's going to lay rubber on the road is in development rates because we have had to stop the [indiscernible] decline at times, especially in the heat, where we just haven't had the year to do all the things we wanted. So really, what trumps any influence on PAF at the moment through this transition period through the remainder of the financial year is development rates. If you're low on development rates, you are not generating much waste anyway. And we've only got last part of the last league of the raisebore. So the whole thing is sensitive to how we step up our development rates with the temporary solution was sort of the partial solution we've got now of ventilation going from 450 to 700. And then when we get to 900 with a lot of it at the bottom of the mine, what set of -- what that jumps up to then. So we've got 2 jumps in development rates. And then they then knock on to how much of the center of the ore body you're able to mine in this financial year. So in a sense, PAF is really, really valuable, but where it gains its value is when we're up and running full flat. What we really, really need to do now is get those development rates up in 2 phases. Now we're already -- well, 3 phases. We've seen an increase from Stean and the team with project Excalibur. That's now picking up now that we've delivered more air. It'll pick up again when we finalized the year in the deeper shaft and that's how all that plays out through the financial year.
Sure. So I guess just rounding back, ultimately, with that partial solution as you described that you've got in place currently, is the pickup to development rates that you're experiencing from that? Is that already accounted for in your rate forecast? Or do you see that as a potential to do better over the remainder of the course of the year?
We've accounted some pickup. What we've actually done is, from the last forecast to this forecast as we just pared back our development rate expectation because we're doing it in 2 steps instead of 1, and that's the -- that's to solve difference, really. So there is upside on -- as there is upside on development rate, but we're not counting on it because we're in a very dynamic situation until we get their last shaft through.
Sure, I understand. And then I guess, just finally, it might be 1 for Maryse, but I guess just after a bit more detail on the progress of permitting at the various measure of the growth projects. Firstly, on the Beaver Dam, I guess, which is probably the next in the sequence. Is it right to say that the regulator has been waiting on further information from you guys since June? Or is it something we're missing there? And then secondly, on FMS, you -- I guess, you're now reviewing the comments you've received on the AIS, back in November, I guess, both of those projects currently consistent with your, I guess, previous expectations on time line in terms of permitting.
All right. I'll hand over to Maryse to share if she's on the line, but I -- before I do that, we've spent quite a bit of time going through, and we've now developed our capital schedule for the studies and other works and geotechnical works we're doing. There have been -- really, what delays the process is request for information. So in the case of Beaver Dam, we're on our second request for information and talking with the government. They want -- and we want this to be the last one, so that we don't end up with a third. So we're trying to pile everything we can into this one, just to get it done and dusted. With Fifteen Mile when we made this submission, the government wanted a bit more information about First Nations engagement, which we're busy with now, but also the stream diversion at Seloam Brook, which we had pointed out is actually a stream diversion in itself that was made some years ago by cutting a trench by the old-timers. So we've got all that in hand to just sort of iron that out. So it doesn't drag us later, but I'll hand over to Maryse.
Okay. Thanks, Bob. But there's not that much to add. I just wanted to point out that at Fifteen Mile Stream for the Seloam Brook, we were asked to provide a plan that was at the detailed engineering level as opposed to more conceptual. So that works since November have been completed, and we are going back to the regulators within the next couple of weeks for Fifteen Mile Stream, and on the Beaver Dam, as per Bob's comments, we have been entering the final information required. And in the background, we have been also really, really busy with land acquisition. So making really good progress overall.
Sure. Thanks, Maryse. I mean, ultimately, would you say that you're still on track in terms of your time line that you guys indicated around the time of the acquisition, do you expect that the, I guess, the more exhaustive way you're responding to these information requests is potentially going to save you more time down the track to enable you to stick to that time line?
It's Bob here. I'll -- and Maryse may add to this. But really, what we're doing is we're recasting all that now because if you -- to your point, if you invest early on, you reap later on in avoiding lots more requests for information. The one thing I will point out and we're just examining this now, and we're working on, obviously, producing a St Barbara sort of development profile moving forward. And that's impacted by a couple of things. Setting aside the permits, we're looking at the scale of some of this operation because when that was published a year ago. That we've actually found more stuff around the existing deposits, 149 Deposit, for example, with Fifteen Mile Stream. We've even got an extension of Touquoy, which we have to get a modification for. So all those things come into sequence and we have to contemplate those. But on the permitting side, 2 things have changed in that time. One is the government is now more interested in us coming to an understanding with the First Nations people early in the process rather than later in the process. Now hopefully, that will balance us out, but it does mean a slower start and hopefully, a quicker finish. So that's something that we need to contemplate. And there's also been a change to the legislation around the Fisheries Act as well, which may require a bit of extra work. So we're just going through that and looking our schedules for that. And bearing in mind that we've got 3 programs on the go that have to be implemented at different times.
Your next question comes from the line of Sam Berridge from Perennial.
Just on your comments regarding the Simberi Sulphide Project. I think you've -- that quite was you'd have a directional decision or be able to provide some direction with the results in February. Being that Craig starting on the 3rd of Feb, I'm just curious, who is going to own this development decision?
The Board.
The Board. So I mean, is it -- then is it appropriate for, well, the Board, and then obviously, the UMD, who's going to have to front investors on the pros and cons of this project to be pre-empting the development decision until Craig's had time to make his own mind up about it? Or is he involved in the process already?
Well, it's fortunate that Craig is -- was running the island next door and he's very experienced sulfides and gold person. So he's out on the 3rd of February, we've been chatting up to that point. What we -- what we'll be doing there is directional. So in a sense, the drilling is all done to -- and the resource and reserves will all be done to JORC standard, right? So -- and we know the cost of the power station, labor, mining, equipment, logistics. So we'll have a very confident NPV view at PFS level and the directional decision is, do we go -- let's stick into full feet here and get ready to build this thing or do we look at some other path, including divestment. And so really, that decision supported by proper JORC material should be pretty simple, I would think.
Yes. Okay. So right. But so -- I mean, won't you say the Board is going to own it, I mean, ultimately, it's going to be Craig, though. Is it not whether time of that decision comes down? Or do you think that decision is basically going to be set before he starts?
Craig will be part of the decision. He starts on the 3rd of February. As the Chairman announced last month, he's asking me to stay on in transition for a couple of months and do 3 things: Atlantic integration, which is going very well, and you can tell there's good results coming out there. Finishing up GEP, which has finished except for the last hole, which I'll be focusing on with Stean and then getting a direction for Simberi. And so Craig and I will be working pretty closely and jointly taking that to the Board. Now we hope to have that to the Board meeting that approves the half year financials, but that's only a couple of weeks away. That's my target. But otherwise, it would be in March. So we're just around the corner from directional decision based on some a very long and intense 30-by-30-meter drilling campaign that has been modeled assayed independently by the labs and is now being resource modeled by a third party. So this is all going to be stuff that the Board can rest assured on. So it will be me and Craig, taking a recommendation to the Board. And that we're pretty close to getting to that point soon.
Okay, understood. And just lastly, on the guidance. I mean, was there any involvement in -- or do Craig have any involvement in setting the new year guidance being that he's going to be the one on June 30 to see whether you make it or not?
Well, Craig hasn't started yet. So he had no influence on the guidance but I thought it'd be nice to him. I'd lowered the bar slightly for him.
Your next question comes from the line of Levi Spry from JPMorgan.
It's been some good questions. Just back in Nova Scotia. So just on the exploration there, what drilling has been the most interesting? When will you do next cut on the reserve and resource and you sort of indicated that 149 and extensions to the Touquoy pit look interesting. So when -- what's the time line, what do you anticipate the time line being to recap that life of mine plan?
Yes. What we'll do is we'll redo resources and reserves for Atlantic on the St Barbara standard time line, which is -- I mean, I would have been doing it before because I want a calendar line. But this means that 6 months later for them. So their cut off for drilling is usually around early April and then we'll bring everything together and then report it for the full year. So you'll be looking at resource, reserves updates for everyone. Obviously, we would have led with Simberi because of the interest there, but for the Atlantic and everyone else when we produce the full financials in August. In terms of what looks interesting there, like I said, I'm interested in all 3 things. I mean, times have moved on since we were -- we announced the acquisition in May. Obviously, we've been engaged for some months before that. A lots happened and 149 looks interesting. Seloam Brook looks interesting. We've even had some interesting things around our existing pits. So I'm particularly interested in the southwest. If we can prove the model that we have of the folder that mineralized argillites exists on that side of the province that's going to be very encouraging. But the thing I would like to see is, and we'll be getting on to this at some point, is just, if you think that Beaver Dam's [indiscernible] about 37 away from Touquoy and Fifteen Mile Stream is about 57 and it's 80 to Cochrane Hill. If you find a deposit, because it's all along that strike, anywhere in between those, it's going to be close to a plant and that's just going to be really good.
And just the -- so recalling your life of mine plan given the permitting pits?
Yes. Look, we'll be working on that in the coming quarter. And probably be able to update our corporate view on that at the next quarter.
Your next question comes from the line of Kate McCutcheon from Citi.
Just on Gwalia, in September quarter, there were some operational issues with stope over break and dilution. Was that a transient issue or related to certain areas? And how is the reconciliation now?
Look, we do tend to get a bit of over break in a couple of years. One is when we -- because we're in a center out section when we did the first stope in the new level, we get over break in dilution, and we're sort of limited thereby going for a smaller struggling stope as the first stope of the level. And we sometimes get a little bit more in the northern side of the ore body as well. It is a bit variable, but we are getting deeper. So it's something we've employed from drilling improvements and everything else to be able to try and manage, but often a bit hard to predict. Look, we've lived with it for a number of years now. It's just that in the past, we've never had to bother you with it because we will just be pulling from another stope. And that's what we want to get to is establish a new level or new levels and get into West Lode, so that we are able to recover from small things operationally. And then now Stean, do you've got anything to add there? Stean might have already gone. We don't usually last an hour on these calls. We've had a lot of questions.
That's okay. That all makes sense. And then just following on a bit from Matt's question around the timing of some of those satellites at Moose River. So I guess, in the DFS, you had Fifteen Mile kicking off in '22 and Cochrane in 2023. Given now the wilderness of your proposal and where permitting's at, does that seem a bit optimistic now? Or do you have any comments on how you're thinking about the timing?
As I said, well, one thing the protected various things on the is it the only potential impact, that's in the area of Cochrane Hill, which is our mine that we're developing the latest in the schedule. And we're engaging with the government on that now. With the rest of the staff, it's just looking and what we'll be working for through in the next quarter is just the investment we made early was working on fisheries requirements. These are not, obviously, marine fisheries, but there's lots of little lakes and stuff around the basin streams. The changed fishery requirements and also how we engage with the First Nations earlier on rather than later. Now there's a potential that if we do it early on, it delays the front end of our process but actually speeds up the back end. So those are things that we're trying to mix through to actually see how we establish that time line. I think the big thing is we've successfully got a permit for Touquoy and we're operating. Beaver Dam, it was the first time I think we were in -- the Touquoy was another provincial-type impairment. It's now all federal. Beaver Dam went on a lot -- a bit too long, and it was because of the front-end loading of that permit of getting good information and there wasn't as quite what we expected, and we've had to fix that by responding to a couple of requests for information. But as I said, the second request for information has been going on a long time, but we're really trying to make sure there's not another one and that would help us. So we're planning for a third. I mean, why our cycle had a third one there and we're hoping to eliminate it that the second one went longer. And with Fifteen Mile Stream, we're really front-end loading the process now, including First Nations. So we're hopeful that, that just gets us very close to a tighter schedule because it is a 365-day process that's only stopped. The delays are delaying starting, which we're experiencing now, but that's to sort out our engagement with First Nations. And if you've done that, then you're going to get less questions later. So all that's mixing in and we are recasting all that from our knowledge and from some of the things we want to do because, as I said, the problem we have is if you don't fix your permit, you never get it and we keep finding more stuff, which might mean, well, we want a bigger concentrator or something like that. So I think we're at a point now where we're locking and loading.
Okay. So at the moment, there's no fundamental change to how you're thinking about the timing?
Not a prism, but we do need to understand the impact of the First Nations and fisheries requirements and we'll have more about that later.
Okay. And then just lastly, still on Moose River, is there any update on the potential patches of that MRRI royalty scheme?
Yes. Look, there's no particular update. The agreement with MRRI in terms of how we can buy them out essentially has triggers and noting by those triggers have completed. So we are busy brewing up our view of the valuation to go through the process as prescribed by the contract, which is to make an offer and if has accepted, fine. If it doesn't, one of the big 4 accounting firms comes up with a valuation, which has to be accepted by that party, not necessarily has to be accepted by us. So we are talking to the Board about our plan for that in the next Board meeting.
There are no further questions at this time. Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today's conference call. Thank you for all participating. You may now all disconnect.
Thanks very much.