OK now I see where your numbers come from. I used table 14.17, which is the same as table 1.1 for my resource numbers. Table 14.1 is the 2008 preFS as you stated. Table 14.2 is the 2011 AMEC RE but it wasn't used for the 2013 FS. The text is confusing as to which version was used but it was the 2012 Tetra-Tech RE study which supplied the Table 1.1(also 14.17). I don't know why the 2011 AMEC study was ditched. Now we're going to get another set of economics in the 2021 PEA and find out what Elmer means by the "change in footprint" of the project that justifies paying for the updated PEA.