Maybe I've missed it but I don't read it as Positive Bankable Feasibility Study having to include (b)(i). They define PBFS as "“Positive Bankable Feasibility Study” means a comprehensive report prepared in good faith that shows the feasibility of placing the Property or part thereof into commercial production and is positive as contemplated in this §55. "

As long as it is positive as contemplated under 5.5...Then it's a PBFS. If we agree it's positive, do we not agree ipso facto that it's a PBFS? And because we've (or at least I have) established that we need either or any, and we're going to use (b)(ii)...then (b)(i) doesn't matter. Again - they have 30 days to make sure it is, but isn't it just a formality?

I should go to law school.