General Discussion, page-2759

If EGR were to mine the full new mineral resource of 290Mt from Epanko before progressing to close the mine then the physical look of the area before commencing the closure process would look somewhat different to what might currently be described in the mine closure plan. This may only require modest cosmetic updates to the mine closure plan, but depending on how it was written and what the approach is, it may also need substantial revision.

For example under the existing mining licence there was no material area of mining that was greater than 1-1.5km away from the active mine area. Under the new enlarged proposal at later stages there will be a substantial mined area that are greater than 1-1.5km from the current mining area. This may mean its appropriate to change the mine closure plan from a situation of mine then close to a situation with a rolling mine closure situation. Under a roll mine closure, EGR may for example undertake a rehabilitation process for any pit areas over 1.5km from the currently active mining operations.

I'm not sure how management could have completed a change of this nature when mining remained in a more concentrated area.