40-F

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 40-F

[  ]	REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
	OR
[X]	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13(a) OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 Commission File Number: 001-32210

	NORTHERN DYNASTY MINERALS LTD.
	(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
British Columbia Canada		1040	Not Applicable
(Province or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		(Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
	15th Floor, 1040 West Georgia Street Vancouver, British Columbia Canada V6E 4H1 (604) 684-6365
	(Address and telephone number of Registrant’s principal executive offices)
	Corporation Service Company Suite 400, 2711 Centerville Road Wilmington, Delaware  19808 (800) 927-9800
	(Name, address (including zip code) and telephone number (including area code) of agent for service in the United States)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:

Title Of Each Class	Name Of Each Exchange On Which Registered
Common Shares, no par value	NYSE American

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

For annual reports, indicate by check mark the information filed with this Form:

[X] Annual Information Form [X] Audited Annual Financial Statements

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the Registrant’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report: 308,237,856 Common Shares

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant by filing the information contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). If “yes” is marked, indicate the file number assigned to the Registrant in connection with such Rule.

Yes  [  ] No [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes  [X] No [  ]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit and post such files).

Yes  [  ] No [X]

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

  Emerging growth company   [X]

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.

Introductory Information

In this annual report, references to “we”, “our”, “us”, the “Company” or “Northern Dynasty”, mean Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. its subsidiaries and consolidated interests, unless the context suggests otherwise.

Northern Dynasty is a Canadian issuer eligible to file its annual report pursuant to Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) on Form 40-F pursuant to the multi-jurisdictional disclosure system (the “MJDS”) adopted by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The equity securities of the Company are further exempt from Sections 14(a), 14(b), 14(c), 14(f) and 16 of the Exchange Act pursuant to Rule 3a12-3 of the Exchange Act.

Unless otherwise indicated, all amounts in this annual report are in Canadian dollars and all references to “$” mean Canadian dollars.

principal documents

The following documents that are filed as exhibits to this annual report are incorporated by reference herein:

Document	Exhibit No.
Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”)	99.7
Audited consolidated financial statements of the Company as at and for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, including the report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm with respect thereto	99.5
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”)	99.6

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This annual report includes or incorporates by reference certain statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements appear in a number of places in this annual report and documents incorporated by reference herein and include statements regarding our intent, belief or current expectation and that of our officers and directors. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. When used in this annual report or in documents incorporated by reference in this annual report, words such as “believe”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “project”, “intend”, “expect”, “may”, “will”, “plan”, “should”, “would”, “contemplate”, “possible”, “attempts”, “seeks” and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. All statements in documents incorporated herein, other than statements of historical facts that address future production, permitting, reserve potential, exploration drilling, exploitation activities and events or developments that the Company expects are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on various factors and were derived utilizing numerous assumptions that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Accordingly, you are cautioned not to put undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Other forward-looking statements include, among others, statements regarding:

● our expectations regarding the potential for securing the necessary permitting of a mine at the Pebble Project and our ability to establish that such a permitted mine can be economically developed;

● the outcome of due diligence and negotiations to complete a partnering transaction;

● the outcome of any other legal proceedings in which we may be engaged;

● our ability to raise capital for exploration and development activities

● expected financial performance in future periods;

● our plan of operations, and

● factors relating to our investment decisions.

Certain of the assumptions we have made include assumptions regarding, among other things:

● that we will be able to secure sufficient capital necessary for continued environmental assessment and permitting activities and engineering work which must be completed prior to any potential development of the Pebble Project which would then require engineering and financing in order to advance to ultimate construction;

● that we will successfully complete a partnering transaction, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all approvals;

● that the Company will ultimately be able to demonstrate that a mine at the Pebble Project can be economically developed and operated in an environmentally sound and socially responsible manner, meeting all relevant federal, state and local regulatory requirements so that we will be ultimately able to obtain permits authorizing construction of a mine at the Pebble Project;

● that the market prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver will not decline significantly or stay depressed for a lengthy period of time;

● that our key personnel will continue their employment with us; and

● that we will continue to be able to secure minimum adequate financing on acceptable terms.

Some of the risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include:

● an inability to ultimately obtain permitting for a mine at the Pebble Project;

● an inability to establish that the Pebble Project may be economically developed and mined or contain commercially viable deposits of ore based on a mine plan for which government authorities are prepared to grant permits;

● an inability to complete a partnering transaction on terms satisfactory to the Company;

● an inability to continue to fund exploration and development activities and other operating costs;

● the highly cyclical and speculative nature of the mineral resource exploration business;

● the pre-development stage economic viability and technical uncertainties of the Pebble Project and the lack of known reserves on our Pebble Project;

● an inability to recover even the financial statement carrying values of the Pebble Project if we cease to continue on a going concern basis;

● the potential for loss of the services of key executive officers;

● a history of, and expectation of further, financial losses from operations impacting our ability to continue on a going concern basis;

● the volatility of gold, copper and molybdenum an silver prices and mining share prices;

● the inherent risk involved in the exploration, development and production of minerals and the presence of unknown geological and other physical and environmental hazards at the Pebble Project;

● the potential for changes in, or the introduction of new, government regulations relating to mining, including laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and project legal titles;

● potential claims by third parties to titles or rights involving the Pebble Project;

● uncertainty related to litigation;

● the possible inability to insure our operations against all risks;

● the highly competitive nature of the mining business;

● the potential dilution to current shareholders from future equity financings;

● the potential dilution to current shareholders from the exercise of share purchase options and warrants to purchase the Company’s shares; and

● that we have never paid dividends and will not do so in the foreseeable future.

We refer you to the section entitled “Risk Factors” under Item 5 in our AIF for more detailed discussion of such risks and other important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those in such forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update or to publicly announce the results of any change to any of the forward-looking statements contained or incorporated by reference herein to reflect actual results, future events or developments, changes in assumptions or changes in other factors affecting the forward-looking statements.

CAUTIONARY NOTE TO UNITED STATES INVESTORS CONCERNING
ESTIMATES OF MEASURED, INDICATED AND INFERRED RESOURCES

The disclosure in this annual report, including the documents incorporated by reference herein, uses terms that comply with reporting standards in Canada and certain estimates are made in accordance with Canadian National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”). NI 43-101 is a rule developed by the Canadian Securities Administrators that establishes standards for all public disclosure an issuer makes of scientific and technical information concerning mineral projects. Unless otherwise indicated, all resource estimates contained in or incorporated by reference in this annual report have been prepared in accordance with NI 43-101. These standards differ significantly from the requirements of the SEC, and resource information contained herein and incorporated by reference herein may not be comparable to similar information disclosed by companies in the United States (“US companies”).

In addition, this annual report uses the terms “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources” and “inferred mineral resources” to comply with the reporting standards in Canada. We advise United States investors that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize them. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into mineral reserves. These terms have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility.

Further, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to whether they can be mined legally or economically. Therefore, United States investors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of the inferred resources exist. In accordance with Canadian rules, estimates of “inferred mineral resources” cannot form the basis of feasibility or other economic studies, except in limited circumstances where permitted under NI 43-101.

It cannot be assumed that all or any part of “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources”, or “inferred mineral resources” will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of the reported “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources”, or “inferred mineral resources” in this annual report is economically or legally mineable.

In addition, disclosure of “contained ounces” is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC only permits issuers to report mineralization as in place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures.

For the above reasons, information contained in this annual report and the documents incorporated by reference herein containing descriptions of our mineral deposits may not be comparable to similar information made public by US companies subject to the reporting and disclosure requirements under the United States federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

NOTE TO UNITED STATES READERS REGARDING DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN UNITED STATES AND CANADIAN REPORTING PRACTICES

The Company is permitted to prepare this annual report in accordance with Canadian disclosure requirements, which are different from those of the United States. Canadian public companies are required to prepare financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”), as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”). Consequently, the Company’s audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board and the audit is performed in accordance with Canadian auditing standards and the standards of the United States Public Accounting Oversight Board, and independence standards of both Canada and the SEC, each of which differ in some respects to United States generally accepted accounting principles (“US GAAP”) and from practices prescribed by the SEC. Therefore, the Company’s financial statements incorporated by reference in this annual report may not be comparable to financial statements prepared in accordance with US GAAP.

DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure controls and procedures are defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act to mean controls and other procedures of an issuer that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and includes, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that such information is accumulated and communicated to the issuer’s management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

As of the end of the period covered by this report, our management carried out an evaluation, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that, as of the end of the period covered by this report, our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13a-15(e), were effective to give a reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit to the SEC under the Exchange Act is:.

● recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and

● accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

It should be noted that while our CEO and our CFO believe that our disclosure controls and procedures provide a reasonable level of assurance that they are effective, they do not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or internal control over financial reporting will prevent all errors and fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived or operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system will be met.

INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING

Internal Control over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management, including the CEO and the CFO, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting (“ICFR”), as defined by Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act, is a process designed by, or under the supervision of the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by the Company’s Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB. The Company’s ICFR includes those policies and procedures that:

● pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;

● provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and

● provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

The Company’s management, including its CEO and CFO, believe that any system of internal control over financial reporting, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Furthermore, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, they cannot provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been prevented or detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by unauthorized override of control. The design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in a cost effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act) for the Company.

The Company’s management, with the participation of the CEO and CFO, assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s ICFR as of December 31, 2017. In making the assessment, it used the criteria set forth in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) published by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Based on its assessment, management has concluded that the Company’s ICFR was effective as of December 31, 2017.

Auditor’s Attestation Report

The Company is presently an “emerging growth company” as defined in section 3(a) of the Exchange Act, and the Company will continue to qualify as an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of:

(a) the last day of the fiscal year during which the Company has total annual gross revenues of US$1,000,000,000 (as such amount is indexed for inflation every 5 years by the SEC) or more;

(b) the last day of the Company’s fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the date of the first sale of common equity securities pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act;

(c) the date on which the Company has, during the previous 3-year period, issued more than US$1,000,000,000 in non-convertible debt; or

(d) the date on which the Company is deemed to be a “large accelerated filer”, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b–2.

Northern Dynasty expects to continue to be an emerging growth company until December 31, 2020.

Generally, a registrant that registers any class of its securities under section 12 of the Exchange Act is required to include in the second and all subsequent annual reports filed by it under the Exchange Act, a management report on internal control over financial reporting and, subject to an exemption available to registrants that are neither an “accelerated filer” or a “larger accelerated filer” (as those terms are defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2), an auditor attestation report on management’s assessment of internal control over financial reporting. However, for so long as the Company continues to qualify as an emerging growth company, the Company will be exempt from the requirement to include an auditor attestation report in its annual reports filed under the Exchange Act, even if it were to qualify as an “accelerated filer” or a “larger accelerated filer”. The Company was an “accelerated filer” for fiscal 2017 (as determined on June 30, 2017, being the last day of the Company’s second fiscal quarter). Based on the Company’s current status as an “emerging growth company” management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s registered public accounting firm and, accordingly, this Annual Report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting.

No Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Management, including the CEO and CFO, has evaluated the Company’s ICFR to determine whether any changes occurred during the period covered by this annual report on Form 40-F that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s ICFR. There have been no changes that occurred during the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s ICFR.

AUDIT COMMITTEE

Our Board of Directors (the “Board”) has established a separately-designated independent Audit and Risk Committee (the “Audit Committee”) of the Board in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act for the purpose of overseeing our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audits of our annual financial statements. As at the date of this annual report, the Audit Committee was comprised of Steven Decker, Christian Milau and Ken Pickering. The Board has determined that each of the members of the Audit Committee is independent as determined under Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act and Section 803 of the NYSE American LLC Company Guide.

AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT

Our Board has determined that Mr. Christian Milau is an audit committee financial expert (as that term is defined in Item 407 of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act) and is an independent director under applicable securities laws and the listing requirements of the NYSE American LLC.

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

The following table sets forth information regarding amounts billed to us by our independent auditor for each of our last two fiscal years ended December 31:

	2017	2016
Audit Fees	$     107,000	$    122,000
Audit-Related Fees	–	182,000
Tax Fees	10,000	–
All Other Fees	–	–
Total	$   117,000	$   304,000

Audit Fees

Audit fees are the aggregate fees billed by our independent auditor for the audit of our annual consolidated financial statements, reviews of interim consolidated financial statements and attestation services that are provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.

Audit-Related Fees

Audit–Related Fees include services that are traditionally performed by the auditor. These audit-related services include employee benefit audits, due diligence assistance, accounting consultations on proposed transactions, internal control reviews and audit or attest services not required by legislation or regulation.

Tax Fees

Tax fees are fees for tax compliance and tax advice on actual or contemplated transactions.

All Other Fees

All other fees relate to services other than the audit fees, audit-related fees and tax fees described above.

Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies

From time to time, management of the Company recommends to and requests approval from the audit committee for audit and non-audit services to be provided by the Company’s auditor. The audit committee routinely considers such requests at committee meetings, and if acceptable to a majority of the audit committee members, pre-approves such audit and non-audit services by a resolution authorizing management to engage the Company’s auditor for such non-audit services, with set maximum dollar amounts for each itemized service. During such deliberations, the audit committee assesses, among other factors, whether the non-audit services requested would be considered “prohibited services” as contemplated by the SEC, and whether the non-audit services requested and the fees related to such services could impair the independence of the auditor.

OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

The Company has not entered into any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on our financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues, expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to investors.

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

The following table lists information as of December 31, 2017 with respect to our known contractual obligations:

Contractual obligation	Total (‘000)	Payments due by period (‘000)
		Less than 1 Year	Between 1 and 3 years	Between 3 and 5 years
Long term debt obligations	$                 –	$                –	$                –	$                 –
Capital (finance) lease obligation	–	–	–	–
Operating lease obligations 1	1,331	370	475	486
Purchase obligations	–	–	–	–
Other long term liabilities 1, 2	14,098	7,448	6,650	–
Total	$     15,429	$       7,818	$      7,125	$           486

Notes

1. Amounts are to be paid by the Company in US dollars. The conversion rate employed in the table was the year end rate of Cdn$1.2573 / US dollar.

2. As a result of the joint settlement agreement between the Company and the EPA in May 2017, the Company’s legal counsel are due US$16.6 million in additional legal fees (“success fees”) of which US$15.9 million is payable in three annual instalments of $5.3 million and the balance of $0.7 million is payable in less than a year. The first annual instalment was paid in December 2017. The next two instalments are payable in December 2018 and 2019 respectively. Of the balance of US$0.7 million, US$0.1 million was paid in December 2017.

The term purchase obligation means an agreement to purchase goods or services that is enforceable and legally binding on the registrant that specifies all significant terms, including: fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased; fixed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing of the transaction.

CODE OF ETHICS

We have adopted a Code of Ethics that applies to our officers, employees and directors and promotes, among other things, honest and ethical conduct. The Code of Ethics meets the requirements for a “code of ethics” within the meaning of that term in Form 40-F. The Code of Ethics was updated in 2007, 2009, 2012 and again in 2013 and is contained in the the Corporate Governance Policies and Procedures Manual in Appendix 4 which is available for download from the Company’s website under Corporate at www.northerndynastyminerals.com.

No substantive amendments were made to the Company’s Code of Ethics during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, and no waivers of the Company’s Code of Ethics were granted to any principal officer of the Company or any person performing similar functions during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017.

NYSE AMERICAN Equities CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The Company’s common shares are listed for trading on the NYSE American Exchange (“NYSE American”). Section 110 of the NYSE American LLC Company Guide permits NYSE American to consider the laws, customs and practices of their home country in relaxing certain NYSE American listing criteria otherwise applicable to foreign issuers, and grants exemptions from NYSE American listing criteria based on these considerations. A company seeking relief under these provisions is required to provide written certification from independent local counsel that the non-complying practice is not prohibited by home country law. A description of the significant ways in which the Company’s governance practices differ from those followed by United States domestic companies pursuant to NYSE American standards is contained on the Company’s website at www.northerndynastyminerals.com.

MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE

Pursuant to Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”), issuers that are operators, or that have a subsidiary that is an operator, of a coal or other mine in the United States are required to disclose in their periodic reports filed with the SEC information regarding specified health and safety violations, orders and citations, related assessments and legal actions, and mining-related fatalities under the regulation of the Federal Mine safety and Health Administration under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. The Company was not the operator of a mine in the United States during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017.

UNDERTAKING

The Registrant undertakes to make available, in person or by telephone, representatives to respond to inquiries made by the Commission staff, and to furnish promptly, when requested to do so by the Commission staff, information relating to: the securities registered pursuant to Form 40-F; the securities in relation to which the obligation to file an annual report on Form 40-F arises; or transactions in said securities.

CONSENT TO SERVICE OF PROCESS

The Company previously filed an Appointment of Agent for Service of Process and Undertaking on Form F-X signed by the Company and its agent for service of process with respect to the class of securities in relation to which the obligation to file this annual report arises, which Form F-X is incorporated herein by reference. Any change to the name or address of the Company’s agent for service shall be communicated promptly to the Commission by amendment to Form F-X referencing the file number of the Company.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the Company certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 40-F and has duly caused this annual report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Date: March 29, 2018.	NORTHERN DYNASTY MINERALS LTD.
	By:   /s/ Ronald W. Thiessen
	Ronald W. Thiessen
	Chief Executive Officer

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description
99.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
99.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Exchange Act, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
99.3	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
99.4	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Exchange Act and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
99.5	Audited consolidated financial statements of the Company and notes thereto as at and for the years ended December 31, 2017, and 2016, together with the report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm thereon
99.6	Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017
99.7	Annual Information Form of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2017
99.8	Consent of Deloitte LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
99.9	Consent of J. David Gaunt, P.Geo.
99.10	Consent of James Lang, P.Geo.
99.11	Consent of Eric Titley, P.Geo.
99.12	Consent of Ting Lu, P.Eng.
99.13	Consent of Stephen Hodgson, P.Eng.

EX-99.1

EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ronald W. Thiessen, certify that:

(1)	I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.;
(2)	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
(3)	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
(4)	The issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:

(a)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b)	designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c)	evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d)	disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 29, 2018

By:	/s/ R. Thiessen
Name:	Ronald W. Thiessen
Title:	Chief Executive Officer

EX-99.2

EXHIBIT 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Marchand Snyman, certify that:

(1)	I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.;
(2)	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
(3)	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
(4)	The issuer’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the issuer and have:

(a)	designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b)	designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c)	evaluated the effectiveness of the issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d)	disclosed in this report any change in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

(5) The issuer’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)	all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b)	any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: March 29, 2018

By:	/s/ M. Snyman
Name:	Marchand Snyman
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

EX-99.3

EXHIBIT 99.3

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Ronald W. Thiessen, Chief Executive Officer of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1)	The Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2)	The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

By:	/s/ R. Thiessen
Name:	Ronald W. Thiessen
Title:	Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 29, 2018

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

EX-99.4

EXHIBIT 99.4

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Marchand Snyman, Chief Financial Officer of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1)	The Annual Report on Form 40-F of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2)	The information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

By:	/s/ M. Snyman
Name:	Marchand Snyman
Title:	Chief Financial Officer

Date: March 29, 2018

This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

EX-99.5

CONSOLIDATED

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

FOR THE YEAR ENDED

DECEMBER 31, 2017 AND 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars)

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Shareholders and the Board of Directors of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Opinion on the Consolidated Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. and subsidiaries (the “Company”), which comprise the consolidated statements of financial position as at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the consolidated statements of comprehensive loss, consolidated statements of changes in equity and consolidated statements of cash flows for the years then ended, and the related notes, including a summary of significant accounting policies and other explanatory information (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”).

In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, and its financial performance and its cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board.

Material Uncertainty Related to Going Concern

Without modifying our opinion, we draw attention to Note 1 to the financial statements, which indicates that the Company incurred a consolidated net loss of $64.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2017 and, as of that date, the Company’s consolidated deficit was $471.0 million. As stated in Note 1 to the financial statements, these conditions, along with other matters as set forth in Note 1, indicate that a material uncertainty exists that raise substantial doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

Basis for Opinion

Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

Auditor’s Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards and the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Those standards also require that we comply with ethical requirements. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB. Further, we are required to be independent of the Company in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Canada and to fulfill our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements.

An audit includes performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on our judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, we consider internal control relevant to the Company’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies and principles used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained in our audits is sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our audit opinion.

/s/ Deloitte LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants

Vancouver, Canada

March 29, 2018

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2009.

Page |  2

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Consolidated Statements of Financial Position

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars)

			December 31			December 31
	Notes		2017			2016
ASSETS
Non-current assets
Restricted Cash		6(b)		757			–
Mineral property, plant and equipment		4	$	133,711		$	142,472
Total non-current assets				134,468			142,472
Current assets
Amounts receivable and prepaid expenses		5		994			679
Cash and cash equivalents		6(a)		67,158			7,196
Total current assets				68,152			7,875
Total Assets			$	202,620		$	150,347
EQUITY
Capital and reserves
Share capital		7	$	513,304		$	452,132
Reserves				95,168			102,821
Deficit				(470,971	)		(406,106	)
Total equity				137,501			148,847
LIABILITIES
Non-current liabilities
Non-refundable early option price installment		3		47,149			–
Trade and other payables		9		6,650			–
Total non-current liabilities				53,799			–
Current liabilities
Payables to related parties		8		1,052			240
Trade and other payables		9		10,268			1,260
Total current liabilities				11,320			1,500
Total liabilities				65,119			1,500
Total Equity and Liabilities			$	202,620		$	150,347

Commitments (note 12)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

These consolidated financial statements are signed on the Company’s behalf by:

/s/ Ronald W. Thiessen	/s/ Christian Milau
Ronald W. Thiessen	Christian Milau
Director	Director

Page |  3

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, except for share information)

			Year ended December 31
	Notes		2017			2016
Expenses
Exploration and evaluation expenses		4, 11	$	22,594		$	7,935
General and administrative expenses		11		9,384			6,729
Legal, accounting and audit				26,358			9,442
Share-based compensation		7(d)-(f)		5,858			2,995
Loss from operating activities				64,194			27,101
Foreign exchange loss (gain)				1,133			(43	)
Interest income				(462	)		(33	)
Amount receivable written off				–			15
Gain on sale of available-for-sale financial assets				–			(70	)
Loss on sale of plant and equipment				–			23
Loss before tax				64,865			26,982
Deferred Income tax (recovery) expense				–			–
Net loss			$	64,865		$	26,982
Other comprehensive loss (income)
Items that may be subsequently reclassified to net loss
Foreign exchange translation difference		4, 7(g)		8,299			4,246
Derecognition of available-for-sale financial assets				–			(105	)
Other comprehensive loss			$	8,299		$	4,141
Total comprehensive loss			$	73,164		$	31,123
Basic and diluted loss per common share		10	$	0.22		$	0.11

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Page |  4

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars)

			Year ended December 31
	Notes		2017			2016
Operating activities
Net loss			$	(64,865	)	$	(26,982	)
Non-cash or non operating items
Amount receivable written off				–			15
Depreciation				176			205
Gain on disposal of available-for-sale financial assets				–			(70	)
Gain on sale of surplus site inventory				–			(11	)
Loss on sale of plant and equipment				–			23
Interest earned on cash				(462	)		(33	)
Non-current legal fees payable				6,865			–
Share-based compensation				5,858			2,995
Unrealized exchange loss				511			68
Changes in working capital items
Restricted cash		6(b)		(796	)		453
Amounts receivable and prepaid expenses				(317	)		405
Trade and other payables				9,618			(645	)
Payables to related parties				393			(437	)
Net cash used in operating activities				(43,019	)		(24,014	)
Investing activities
Acquisition of plant and equipment				(473	)		–
Proceeds from disposal of available-for-sale financial assets				–			1,754
Proceeds from sale of surplus site inventory				–			11
Interest received on cash and cash equivalents				414			33
Net cash (used in) from investing activities				(59	)		1,798
Financing activities
Net proceeds from prospectus financing		7(b)		–			16,030
Net proceeds from private placement		7(b)		–			1,967
Net proceeds from bought deal financing		7(b)		45,887			–
Cash settlement of equity-settled restricted share units		7(f)		(1,098	)		–
Witholding taxes paid on equity-settled restricted share units		7(f)		(30	)		–
Non-refundable early option price installment		3		48,308			–
Proceeds from the exercise of share purchase options		7(c)-(d)		1,803			611
Proceeds from the exercise of warrants		7(c)		9,817			3,363
Net cash from financing activities				104,687			21,971
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents				61,609			(245	)
Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash and cash equivalents				(1,647	)		(68	)
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning balance				7,196			7,509
Cash and cash equivalents - ending balance		6(a)	$	67,158		$	7,196

Supplementary cash flow information (note 6(a))

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Page |  5

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, except for share information)

	Notes		Share capital				Reserves
										Foreign
							Equity settled			currency						Share
			Number of				share-based			translation			Investment			Purchase
			shares				compensation			reserve			revaluation			Warrants						Total
			(note 7(a))		Amount		reserve			(note 7(g))			reserve			(note 7(c))			Deficit			equity
Balance at January 1, 2016				221,939,376	$	435,069	$	56,197		$	40,479		$	(107	)	$	2,466		$	(379,124	)	$	154,980
Shares issued pursuant to private placement, net of transaction costs		7(b)		4,444,376		1,264		–			–			–			–			–			1,264
Shares issued pursuant to prospectus financing, net of transaction costs		7(b)		38,000,000		10,347		–			–			–			–			–			10,347
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan		7(d)		548,869		503		–			–			–			–			–			503
Shares issued upon exercise of options not under option plan		7(c)		376,000		132		–			–			–			–			–			132
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants		7(c)		5,560,940		3,363		–			–			–			–			–			3,363
Warrants issued pursuant to private placement, net of transaction costs		7(b)		–		–		–			–			–			703			–			703
Warrants issued pursuant to prospectus financing, net of transaction costs		7(b)		–		–		–			–			–			5,683			–			5,683
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised per plan		7(d)		–		266		(266	)		–			–			–			–			–
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised not under option plan		7(c)		–		98		–			–			–			(98	)		–			–
Fair value and costs allocated to share capital on exercise of warrants				–		1,090		–			–			–			(1,090	)		–			–
Share-based compensation		7(d)-(f)		–		–		2,995			–			–			–			–			2,995
Net loss				–		–		–			–			–			–			(26,982	)		(26,982	)
Other comprehensive (loss) income net of tax				–		–		–			(4,246	)		105			–			–			(4,141	)
Total comprehensive loss																							(31,123	)
Balance at December 31, 2016				270,869,561	$	452,132	$	58,926		$	36,233		$	(2	)	$	7,664		$	(406,106	)	$	148,847
Balance at January 1, 2017				270,869,561	$	452,132	$	58,926		$	36,233		$	(2	)	$	7,664		$	(406,106	)	$	148,847
Shares issued pursuant to bought deal financing, net of transaction costs		7(b)		20,240,000		45,887		–			–			–			–			–			45,887
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan		7(d)		1,277,200		1,756		–			–			–			–			–			1,756
Shares issued on exercise of options not under option plan		7(c)		118,800		47		–			–			–			–			–			47
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants		7(c)		15,710,201		9,817		–			–			–			–			–			9,817
Shares issued pursuant to restricted share unit plan		7(f)		22,094		49		(49	)		–			–			–			–			–
Cash settlement of tax on issue of equity-settled restricted share units		7(f)		–		–		(30	)		–			–			–			–			(30	)
Cash settlement of equity-settled restricted share units		7(f)		–		–		(1,098	)		–			–			–			–			(1,098	)
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised per plan		7(d)		–		822		(822	)		–			–			–			–			–
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised not under option plan		7(c)		–		44		–			–			–			(44	)		–			–
Fair value and costs transferred to share capital on exercise of warrants		7(c)		–		2,750		–			–			–			(2,750	)		–			–
Fair value transferred to reserve on expiry of warrants		7(c)		–		–		38			–			–			(38	)		–			–
Share-based compensation		7(d)-(f)		–		–		5,439			–			–			–			–			5,439
Net loss				–		–		–			–			–			–			(64,865	)		(64,865	)
Other comprehensive loss net of tax				–		–		–			(8,299	)		–			–			–			(8,299	)
Total comprehensive loss																							(73,164	)
Balance at December 31, 2017				308,237,856	$	513,304	$	62,404		$	27,934		$	(2	)	$	4,832		$	(470,971	)	$	137,501

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

Page |  6

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

1. NATURE AND CONTINUANCE OF OPERATIONS

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) is incorporated under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Canada, and its principal business activity is the exploration of mineral properties. The Company is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) under the symbol “NDM” and on the New York Stock Exchange-MKT (“NYSE-MKT”) under the symbol “NAK”. The Company’s corporate office is located at 1040 West Georgia Street, 15^th floor, Vancouver, British Columbia.

The consolidated financial statements (“Financial Statements”) of the Company as at and for the year ended December 31, 2017, include financial information for the Company and its subsidiaries (note 2(c)) (together referred to as the “Group” and individually as “Group entities”). The Company is the ultimate parent. The Group’s core mineral property interest is the Pebble Copper-Gold-Molybdenum Project (the “Pebble Project”) located in Alaska, United States of America (“USA” or “US”). All US Dollar amounts when presented are expressed in thousands, unless otherwise stated.

The Group is in the process of exploring and developing the Pebble Project and has not yet determined whether the Pebble Project contains mineral reserves that are economically recoverable. The Group’s continuing operations and the underlying value and recoverability of the amounts shown for the Group’s mineral property interests, is entirely dependent upon the existence of economically recoverable mineral reserves; the ability of the Group to obtain financing to complete the exploration and development of the Pebble Project; the Group obtaining the necessary permits to mine; and future profitable production or proceeds from the disposition of the Pebble Project.

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the company raised gross proceeds of US$37,440 ($49,067) through a bought deal financing (note 7(b)), $11,620 from the exercise of share purchase options and warrants (notes 7(c)-(d)) and received an early option price installment of US37,500 ($48,308) (note 3).

As at December 31, 2017, the Group has $67,158 in cash and cash equivalents for its operating requirements. The Group incurred a net loss of $64,865 and $26,982 during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively and had a deficit $470,971 as at December 31, 2017. The Group is required to utilize the non-refundable early price installment funds (note 3) solely for permitting related expenditures at the Pebble Project. The Group has prioritized the allocation of the remaining available financial resources to meet key corporate expenditure requirements in the near term. Additional financing will be required for working capital for the Company as well as to progress any material expenditures at the Pebble Project in 2018 should there be no formal agreement entered into (note 3). There can be no assurances that the Group will be successful in obtaining additional financing. If the Group is unable to raise the necessary capital resources and generate sufficient cash flows to meet obligations as they come due, the Group may, at some point, consider reducing or curtailing its operations. As such there is material uncertainty that raises substantial doubt about the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern.

From 2014-to May 2017, the Group was focused on a multi-dimensional strategy which included legal and other initiatives designed to ward off a pre-emptive regulatory action by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). On May 12, 2017, the Group announced that the Pebble Limited Partnership (the “Pebble Partnership”) and the EPA had reached a joint settlement agreement over the federal agency’s pre-emptive regulatory action. As a result of the joint settlement, the Group through the Pebble Partnership, filed documentation for a CWA 404 permit with the US Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) on December 22, 2017, thereby initiating federal and state permitting for the Pebble Project under the National Environmental Protection Act (“NEPA”) which documentation was accepted as complete by the USACE in January 2018.

Page |  7

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

2.	SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
(a)	Statement of Compliance

These Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) and interpretations issued by the IFRS Interpretations Committee (“IFRIC”s) that are effective for the Group’s reporting for the year ended December 31, 2017. These Financial Statements were authorized for issue by the Board of Directors on March 28, 2018.

(b) Basis of Preparation

These Financial Statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis using the accrual basis of accounting, except for cash flow information and for financial instruments classified as available-for-sale, which are stated at their fair value (notes 2(e)). The accounting policies set out below have been applied consistently to all periods presented in these Financial Statements.

(c) Basis of Consolidation

These Financial Statements incorporate the financial statements of the Company, the Company’s subsidiaries, and entities controlled by the Company and its subsidiaries listed below:

Name of Subsidiary	Place of Incorporation	Principal Activity	Ownership
3537137 Canada Inc. 1	Canada	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Pebble Services Inc.	Nevada, USA	Management and services company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Northern Dynasty Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holds 99.9% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership and 100% of Pebble Mines Corp.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Limited Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holding Company and Exploration of the Pebble Project.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Mines Corp.	Delaware, USA	General Partner. Holds 0.1% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble West Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble East Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
U5 Resources Inc. 3	Nevada, USA	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Cannon Point Resources Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
MGL Subco Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Delta Minerals Inc.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of MGL Subco Ltd.	100% (indirect)
Imperial Gold Corporation	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Minerals Inc.	100% (indirect)
Yuma Gold Inc.	Nevada, USA	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Imperial Gold Corporation.	100% (indirect)

Page |  8

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Notes:

1.	Holds 20% interest in the Northern Dynasty Partnership. The Company holds the remaining 80% interest.
2.	Both entities together hold 2,182 claims of the Pebble Project.
3.	Holds 220 claims of the Pebble Project. Subsequent to the reporting date, these claims were sold to Pebble West Claims Corporation.

Control is achieved when the Group is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee. Specifically, the Group controls an investee if, and only if, the Company has power over the investee (i.e. existing rights that give it the current ability to direct the relevant activities of the investee); exposure, or rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee; and the ability to use its power over the investee to affect its returns.

Intra-Group balances and transactions, including any unrealized income and expenses arising from intra-Group transactions, are eliminated in preparing the Financial Statements. Unrealized gains arising from transactions with equity accounted investees are eliminated against the investment to the extent of the Group’s interest in the investee. Unrealized losses are eliminated in the same way as unrealized gains, but only to the extent that there is no evidence of impairment.

(d) Foreign Currencies

The functional currency is the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates and has been determined for each entity within the Group. The functional currency of U5 Resources Inc., Pebble Services Inc., Pebble Mines Corp., the Pebble Partnership and its subsidiaries, and Yuma Gold Inc. is the US dollar and for all other entities within the Group, the functional currency is the Canadian dollar. The functional currency determinations were conducted through an analysis of the factors for consideration identified in IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates.

Transactions in currencies other than the functional currency are recorded at the rates of exchange prevailing on the dates of transactions. At the end of each reporting period, monetary assets and liabilities that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the rates prevailing at that date. Non-monetary assets and liabilities carried at fair value that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at rates prevailing at the date when the fair value was determined. Non-monetary items that are measured in terms of historical cost in a foreign currency are not retranslated.

The results and financial position of entities within the Group which have a functional currency that differs from that of the Group are translated into Canadian dollars as follows: (i) assets and liabilities for each statement of financial position are translated at the closing exchange rate at that date; (ii) income and expenses for each income statement are translated at average exchange rates for the period; and (iii) the resulting exchange differences are included in the foreign currency translation reserve within equity.

Page |  9

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(e) Financial Instruments

Non-derivative financial assets:

The Group has the following non-derivative financial assets: available-for-sale financial assets (of nominal value) and loans and receivables.

Available-for-sale financial assets

Available-for-sale (“AFS”) financial assets are non-derivatives that are either designated as AFS or are not classified as (i) loans and receivables, (ii) held-to-maturity investments or (iii) financial assets at fair value through profit or loss. The Group’s investments in marketable securities are classified as AFS financial assets. Subsequent to initial recognition, they are measured at fair value and changes therein, other than impairment losses, are recognized in other comprehensive income or loss and accumulated in the investment revaluation reserve within equity. When an investment is derecognized, the cumulative gain or loss in the investment revaluation reserve is transferred to profit or loss.

The fair value of AFS monetary assets denominated in a foreign currency is determined in that foreign currency and translated at the spot rate at the end of the reporting period. The change in fair value attributable to translation differences that result from the amortized cost of the monetary asset is recognized within other comprehensive income or loss. The change in fair value of AFS equity investments is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss.

Loans and receivables

Loans and receivables are financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. Such assets are initially recognized at fair value plus any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition, loans and receivables are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method, less any impairment losses.

Loans and receivables consist of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash (note 6), and amounts receivable (note 5).

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash in the statements of financial position are comprised of cash and highly liquid investments having maturity dates of three months or less from the date of purchase, which are readily convertible into known amounts of cash.

The Group’s cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash are invested in business and savings accounts, guaranteed investment certificates and government treasury bills at major financial institutions and are available on demand by the Group when required and, as such, are subject to an insignificant risk of change in value.

Non-derivative financial liabilities:

The Group’s non-derivative financial liabilities comprise of trade and other payables (note 9) and payables to related parties (note 8).

All financial liabilities fall within the classification of other financial liabilities versus financial liabilities through profit or loss, and are recognized initially at fair value net of any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition these financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method.

Page |  10

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Impairment of financial assets:

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income or loss are reclassified to profit or loss in the period. Financial assets are assessed for indicators of impairment at the end of each reporting period. Financial assets are impaired when there is objective evidence that, as a result of one or more events that occurred after the initial recognition of the financial assets, the estimated future cash flows of the investments have been impacted. For marketable securities classified as AFS, a significant or prolonged decline in the fair value of the securities below their cost is considered to be objective evidence of impairment.

For all other financial assets, objective evidence of impairment could include:

● significant financial difficulty of the issuer or counterparty; or

● default or delinquency in interest or principal payments; or

● it becoming probable that the borrower will enter bankruptcy or financial re-organization.

For certain categories of financial assets, such as amounts receivable, assets that are assessed not to be impaired individually are subsequently assessed for impairment on a collective basis. The carrying amount of financial assets is reduced by the impairment loss directly for all financial assets with the exception of amounts receivable, where the carrying amount is reduced through the use of an allowance account. When an amount receivable is considered uncollectible, it is written off against the allowance account. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are credited against the allowance account. Changes in the carrying amount of the allowance account are recognized in profit or loss.

With the exception of AFS equity instruments, if, in a subsequent period, the amount of the impairment loss decreases and the decrease can be related objectively to an event occurring after the impairment was recognized, the previously recognized impairment loss is reversed through profit or loss to the extent that the carrying amount of the investment at the date the impairment is reversed does not exceed what the amortized cost would have been had the impairment not been recognized. In respect of AFS equity securities, impairment losses previously recognized through profit or loss are not reversed through profit or loss. Any increase in fair value subsequent to an impairment loss is recognized directly in equity.

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income are reclassified to profit or loss in the reporting period.

Derivative financial assets and liabilities:

The Group has no derivative financial assets or liabilities.

(f) Exploration and Evaluation Expenditure

Exploration and evaluation expenditures include the costs of acquiring licenses, costs associated with exploration and evaluation activity, and the acquisition date fair value of exploration and evaluation assets acquired in a business combination or an asset acquisition. Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expensed as incurred except for expenditures associated with the acquisition of exploration and evaluation assets through a business combination or an asset acquisition. Costs incurred before the Group has obtained the legal rights to explore an area are expensed.

Acquisition costs, including general and administrative costs, are only capitalized to the extent that these costs can be related directly to operational activities in the relevant area of interest where it is considered likely to be recoverable by future exploitation or sale or where the activities have not reached a stage which permits a reasonable assessment of the existence of reserves.

Page |  11

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) assets are assessed for impairment only when facts and circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of an E&E asset may exceed its recoverable amount and when the Group has sufficient information to reach a conclusion about technical feasibility and commercial viability.

Industry-specific indicators for an impairment review arise typically when one of the following circumstances applies:

● Substantive expenditure on further exploration and evaluation activities is neither budgeted nor planned;

● title to the asset is compromised;

● adverse changes in the taxation and regulatory environment;

● adverse changes in variations in commodity prices and markets; and

● variations in the exchange rate for the currency of operation.

Once the technical feasibility and commercial viability of the extraction of mineral resources in an area of interest are demonstrable, exploration and evaluation assets attributable to that area of interest are first tested for impairment and then reclassified to mining property and development assets within property, plant and equipment.

Recoverability of the carrying amount of any exploration and evaluation assets is dependent on successful development and commercial exploitation, or alternatively, sale of the respective assets.

(g) Mineral property, plant and equipment

Mineral property, plant and equipment are carried at cost, less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses.

The cost of mineral property, plant and equipment consists of the acquisition costs transferred from E&E assets, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, including costs to further delineate the ore body, development and construction costs, removal of overburden to initially expose the ore body, an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling, removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located and, if applicable, borrowing costs.

Mineral property acquisition and development costs are not currently depreciated as the Pebble Project is still in the development stage and no saleable minerals are being produced.

The cost of an item of plant and equipment consists of the purchase price, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, and an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling and removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located.

Depreciation is provided at rates calculated to write off the cost of plant and equipment, less their estimated residual value, using the declining balance method at various rates ranging from 20% to 30% per annum.

An item of equipment is derecognized upon disposal or when no future economic benefits are expected to arise from the continued use of the asset. Any gain or loss arising on disposal of the asset, determined as the difference between the net disposal proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset, is recognized in profit or loss.

Where an item of equipment consists of major components with different useful lives, the components are accounted for as separate items of equipment. Expenditures incurred to replace a component of an item of equipment that is accounted for separately, including major inspection and overhaul expenditures, are capitalized.

Residual values and estimated useful lives are reviewed at least annually.

Page |  12

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(h) Impairment of Non-Financial Assets

At the end of each reporting period the carrying amounts of the Group’s non-financial assets are reviewed to determine whether there is any indication that these assets are impaired. If any such indication exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated in order to determine the extent of the impairment loss, if any. Where it is not possible to estimate the recoverable amount of an individual asset, the Group estimates the recoverable amount of the cash-generating unit to which the asset belongs. The recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell and value in use. Fair value is determined as the amount that would be obtained from the sale of the asset in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable and willing parties. In assessing value in use, the estimated future cash flows are discounted to their present value using a pre-tax discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the asset. If the recoverable amount of an asset is estimated to be less than its carrying amount, the carrying amount of the asset is reduced to its recoverable amount and the impairment loss is recognized in profit or loss for the period. For an asset that does not generate largely independent cash inflows, the recoverable amount is determined for the cash generating unit to which the asset belongs.

Where an impairment loss subsequently reverses, the carrying amount of the asset (or cash-generating unit) is increased to the revised estimate of its recoverable amount. This increase in the carrying amount is limited to the carrying amount that would have been determined had no impairment loss been recognized for the asset (or cash-generating unit) in prior years. A reversal of an impairment loss is recognized immediately in profit or loss. The Group has not recorded any impairment charges in the years presented.

(i) Share Capital, Special Warrants and Warrants

Common shares, special warrants and warrants (notes 7(b)-(c)) are classified as equity. Transaction costs directly attributable to the issue of common shares, share purchase options, special warrants and warrants are recognized as a deduction from equity, net of any tax effects. Where units comprising of common shares and warrants are issued (note 7(b)), the proceeds and any transaction costs are apportioned between the common shares and warrants according to their relative fair values.

Upon conversion of special warrants and warrants into common shares, the carrying amount, net of a pro rata share of the transaction costs, is transferred to common share capital.

(j) Share-based Payment Transactions

Equity-settled share-based Option Plan

The Group operates an equity-settled share-based option plan for its employees and service providers (note 7(d)). The fair value of share purchase options granted is recognized as an employee or consultant expense with a corresponding increase in the equity-settled share-based payments reserve in equity (the “Equity Reserve”). An individual is classified as an employee when the individual is an employee for legal or tax purposes (“direct employee”) or provides services similar to those performed by a direct employee.

The fair value is measured at grant date for each tranche, which is expensed on a straight line basis over the vesting period, with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve. The fair value of share purchase options granted is measured using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, taking into account the terms and conditions upon which the share purchase options were granted and forfeiture rates as appropriate. At the end of each reporting period, the amount recognized as an expense is adjusted to reflect the actual number of share purchase options that are expected to vest.

Page |  13

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Deferred Share Unit (“DSU”) Plan

The Group has a DSU plan for its non-executive directors. The Group determines whether to account for DSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of DSUs granted is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity-settled or a liability is raised if cash-settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at grant date and expensed over the vesting period as share-based compensation in the statement of loss and comprehensive loss until they are fully vested. If the DSUs are cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares.

Restricted Share Unit (“RSU”) Plan

The Group has a RSU plan for its employees, executive directors and eligible consultants of the Group. The Group determines whether to account for the RSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of RSUs is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity –settled or a liability is raised if cash settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the number of RSUs and the quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at the grant date. It is then expensed over the vesting period with the credit recognized in equity in the Equity Reserve. If cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the quoted market value of the Company’s common shares.

(k) Income Taxes

Income tax on the profit or loss for the years presented comprises current and deferred tax. Income tax is recognized in profit or loss except to the extent that it relates to items recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or directly in equity, in which case it is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or equity.

Current tax expense is the expected tax payable on the taxable income for the year, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at year end, adjusted for amendments to tax payable with regard to previous years.

Deferred tax is provided using the balance sheet liability method, providing for unused tax loss carry forwards and temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for taxation purposes. The following temporary differences are not provided for: goodwill not deductible for tax purposes; the initial recognition of assets or liabilities that affect neither accounting nor taxable profit; and differences relating to investments in subsidiaries, associates, and joint ventures to the extent that they will probably not reverse in the foreseeable future. The amount of deferred tax provided is based on the expected manner of realization or settlement of the carrying amount of assets and liabilities, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at the end of the reporting period applicable to the period of expected realization or settlement.

A deferred tax asset is recognized only to the extent that it is probable that future taxable profits will be available against which the asset can be utilized.

Additional income taxes that arise from the distribution of dividends are recognized at the same time as the liability to pay the related dividend.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are offset when there is a legally enforceable right to set off current tax assets against current tax liabilities and when they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation authority and the Group intends to settle its current tax assets and liabilities on a net basis.

Page |  14

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(l) Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Environmental Obligations

An obligation to incur restoration, rehabilitation and environmental costs arises when environmental disturbance is caused by the exploration or development of a mineral property interest. Such costs arising from the decommissioning of plant and other site preparation work, discounted to their net present value, are provided for and capitalized at the start of each project to the carrying amount of the asset, along with a corresponding liability as soon as the obligation to incur such costs arises. The timing of the actual rehabilitation expenditure is dependent on a number of factors such as the life and nature of the asset, the operating license conditions and, when applicable, the environment in which the mine operates.

Discount rates using a pre-tax rate that reflects the time value of money are used to calculate the net present value. These costs are charged against profit or loss over the economic life of the related asset, through amortization using either the unit-of-production or the straight line method. The corresponding liability is progressively increased as the effect of discounting unwinds, creating an expense recognized in profit or loss.

Decommissioning costs are also adjusted for changes in estimates. Those adjustments are accounted for as a change in the corresponding capitalized cost, except where a reduction in costs is greater than the unamortized capitalized cost of the related assets, in which case the capitalized cost is reduced to nil and the remaining adjustment is recognized in profit or loss.

The operations of the Group have been, and may in the future be, affected from time to time in varying degree by changes in environmental regulations, including those for site restoration costs. Both the likelihood of new regulations and their overall effect upon the Group are not predictable.

The Group has no material restoration, rehabilitation and environmental obligations as the disturbance to date is immaterial. As a condition for the issue of the Miscellaneous Land Use Permit at the Pebble Project, the Pebble Partnership has posted a bond with the Alaskan regulatory authorities as performance guarantee for any potential reclamation liability (note 6(b)).

(m) Loss per Share

The Group presents basic and diluted loss per share information for its common shares, calculated by dividing the loss attributable to common shareholders of the Group by the weighted average number of common shares and any fully prepaid special warrants outstanding during the year. Diluted loss per share does not adjust the loss attributable to common shareholders or the weighted average number of common shares outstanding when the effect is anti-dilutive.

(n) Segment Reporting

The Group operates in a single reportable operating segment – the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties. The Group’s core asset, the Pebble Project, is located in Alaska, USA.

(o) Significant Accounting Estimates and Judgments

The preparation of these Financial Statements requires management to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the Financial Statements and reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. Actual outcomes could differ from these estimates. These Financial Statements include estimates which, by their nature, are uncertain. The impacts of such estimates are pervasive throughout the Financial Statements, and may require accounting adjustments based on future occurrences. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. These estimates are based on historical experience, current and future economic conditions and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Page |  15

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Sources of estimation uncertainty

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty that management has made at the end of the reporting period, that could result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities, in the event that actual results differ from assumptions made, relate to, but are not limited to, the following:

1.

The Group uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to calculate the fair value of share purchase options granted for determining share-based compensation included in the loss for the year. Inputs used in this model require subjective assumptions, including the expected price volatility from three to five years. Changes in the subjective input assumptions can affect the fair value estimate. The weighted average assumptions applied are disclosed in note 7(d).

2.

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty are made in determining the provision for any deferred income tax expense included in the loss for the year and the composition of any deferred income tax liabilities included in the Statement of Financial Position.

Critical accounting judgments

These include:

1.	In terms of IFRS 6, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources, management determined that there were no circumstance and facts that indicated that testing the Group’s mineral property interest (“MPI”) for impairment was necessary.
2.	Pursuant to IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates (“IAS 21”) in determining the functional currency of the parent and its subsidiaries, the Group used judgment in identifying the currency in which financing activities are denominated and the currency that mainly influences the cost of undertaking the business activities in each jurisdiction in which each entity operates.
3.	The Group has employed judgement that going concern was an appropriate basis for the preparation of the Financial Statements, as the Group considered existing and future available financial resources in determining that such financial resources are able to meet key corporate and Pebble Project expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months (note 1).
4.	The Group employed judgment in the accounting for the non-refundable early option price installment received by the Group pursuant to the framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (note 3) as a non-current liability at the reporting date as no interest in the Pebble Partnership had been acquired or an option agreement to acquire an interest had been entered into.

(p) Amendments, Interpretations, Revised and New Standards Adopted by the Group

The Group adopted the following amendments and annual improvements that became effective January 1, 2017:

● Amendments to IAS 7, Statement of Cash Flows – Disclosure Initiative

● Amendments to IAS 12, Income Taxes – Recognition of Deferred Tax Assets for Unrealised Losses

● Annual improvements to IFRS 2014 – 2016 Cycle – Amendments to IFRS 12, Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities

The amendments and annual improvements had no material effect on the Financial Statements.

Early adoption

● Amendments to IFRS 2, Share-based Payment (“IFRS 2”) – Classification and Measurement of Share-based Payment Transactions

Page |  16

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

The amendments to IFRS 2 clarify: a) the accounting for cash-settled share-based payment transactions that include a performance condition and include accounting requirements; b) the classification of share based payment transactions with net settlement features. This amendment provides for an exception for a share-based payment arrangement that is settled on a net basis to be classified as equity-settled in its entirety provided the share-based payment would have been classified as equity-settled had it not included the net settlement feature; and c) the accounting for modifications of share-based payment transactions from cash-settled to equity-settled. The amendments are effective for annual periods on or after January 1, 2018 with early application permitted.

The Group has early adopted these amendments and accordingly has classified share-based compensation with a net settlement feature as equity-settled and measured it accordingly (note 7(f)).

(q) Accounting Standards, Amendments and Revised Standards Not Yet Effective

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2018

● IFRS 9, Financial Instruments (“IFRS 9”)

IFRS 9 replaces IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, in its entirety. The standard incorporates a number of improvements: a) includes a logical model for classification and measurement (IFRS 9 provides for principle-based approach to classification which is driven by cash flow characteristics and the business model in which an asset is held); b) includes a single, forward-looking “expected loss” impairment model (IFRS 9 will require entities to account for expected credit losses from when financial instruments are first recognized and to recognize full lifetime expected losses on a timely basis); and c) includes a substantially-reformed model for hedge accounting with enhanced disclosures about risk management activity (IFRS 9’s new model aligns the accounting treatment with risk management activities). The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 9 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements given the extent of its current use of financial instruments.

● IFRS 15, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“IFRS 15”)

IFRS 15 supersedes IAS 11, Construction Contracts, IAS 18, Revenue, IFRIC 13, Customer Loyalty Programmes, IFRIC 15, Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate, IFRIC 18, Transfers of Assets from Customers and SIC 31, Revenue – Barter Transactions Involving Advertising Services. IFRS 15 establishes a single five-step model framework for determining the nature, amount, timing and certainty of revenue and cash flows arising from a contract with a customer. The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 15 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements as the Group does not generate significant revenue given the Group’s current stage of development of the Pebble Project. The Group will reassess the impact once significant revenue is generated.

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2019

● IFRS 16, Leases (“IFRS 16”).

The IASB issued IFRS 16 and revised IAS 17 in January 2016. IFRS 16 specifies how to recognize, measure, present and disclose leases. IFRS 16 provides a single lessee accounting model, requiring the recognition of assets and liabilities for all leases, unless the term of the lease is twelve months or less or the underlying asset has a low value. Lessor accounting however remains unchanged from IAS 17 and the distinction between operating and finance leases is retained. IFRS 16 now prescribes the accounting policies and disclosures applicable to leases, both for lessees and lessors.

Page |  17

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

The Group will adopt IFRS 16 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will not have a significant impact other than the accounting for office, accommodation and storage leases the Group may have entered into where the minimum lease term is more than 12 months.

3. FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT WITH FIRST QUANTUM MINERALS LTD.

In December 2017, the Group announced the signing of a framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (“First Quantum”). The framework agreement contemplates that an affiliate of First Quantum may subsequently execute an option agreement with the Group. The option agreement contemplates an option payment of US$150 million staged over four years which will entitle First Quantum to acquire the right to earn a 50% interest in the Pebble Partnership for US$1.35 billion. The option period may be extended for up to 2 years by First Quantum making payments to be agreed upon which amounts will be offset against the US$1.35 billion additional investment amount. The Group received a non-refundable early option payment of US$37,500 ($48,308) (“Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment”). The Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment is to be applied solely for the purpose of progressing the permitting of the Pebble Project.

As the entry by First Quantum into the option agreement is contingent upon the completion of due diligence, obtaining necessary regulatory approvals and the successful negotiation of the final form of the option agreement and associated commercial agreements, the Group has recorded the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment as a non-current payable.

4. MINERAL PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT

The Group’s exploration and evaluation assets are comprised of the following:

Year ended December 31, 2017	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	881		$	113,422
Additions		–		473			473
Ending balance		112,541		1,354			113,895
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Depreciation 2		–		(176	)		(176	)
Ending balance		–		(734	)		(734	)
Foreign currency translation difference		20,361		189			20,550
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	132,902	$	809		$	133,711

Page |  18

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Year ended December 31, 2016	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	1,032		$	113,573
Dispositions		–		(151	)		(151	)
Ending balance		112,541		881			113,422
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(481	)		(481	)
Depreciation 2		–		(205	)		(205	)
Eliminated on disposal		–		128			128
Ending balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Foreign currency translation difference		29,381		227			29,608
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	141,922	$	550		$	142,472

Notes to tables:

1.	Comprises the Pebble Project, a contiguous block of 2,402 mineral claims covering approximately 417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.
2.	Depreciation is included in exploration and evaluation expenses.

5. AMOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND PREPAID EXPENSES

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Sales tax receivable	$	96	$	50
Amounts receivable		487		138
Prepaid expenses		411		491
Total	$	994	$	679

Page |  19

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

6.	CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AND RESTRICTED CASH
(a)	Cash and Cash Equivalents

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Business and savings accounts 1	$	62,830	$	7,196
Guaranteed Investment Certificates		4,328		–
Total	$	67,158	$	7,196

Note:

1. $47,149 of this amount relates to the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment of US$37,500 received which is to be used solely for progressing permitting at the Pebble Project (note 3).

Supplementary cash flow information

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

In the year ended December 31, 2017:

● 61,500 warrants were exercised into common shares for which payment was received subsequent to the reporting date (note 7(a)); and

● 22,094 common shares were issued to settle the payout of vested RSUs (note 7(f)).

(b) Restricted Cash

The Group has a cash deposit of US$600 ($757) with a United States financial institution which has been pledged as collateral to the surety provider for the surety bond accepted by the Alaskan regulatory authorities (see below). The cash deposit will be released once any reclamation work required has been performed and assessed by the Alaskan regulatory authorities.

The Group posted a bond of US$2,000 with the Alaskan regulatory authorities for a performance guarantee related to any potential reclamation liability as a condition of the Miscellaneous Land Use Permit granted to the Pebble Partnership for its ongoing activities on the Pebble Project.

7.	CAPITAL AND RESERVES
(a)	Authorized Share Capital

At December 31, 2017, the authorized share capital comprised an unlimited (2016 – unlimited) number of common shares with no par value. As of the reporting date, 308,176,356 common shares were issued and fully paid. A further 61,500 common shares were issued but were delivered and paid for subsequent to December 31, 2017 (note 6(a)).

(b) Financings and Other

January 2017

The Group completed a bought deal offering (the “Offering”) of 20,240,000 common shares at US$1.85 per common share for gross proceeds of US$37,440 ($49,067). The Offering was completed by way of a prospectus filed in all of the provinces of Canada, other than Québec, and was offered in the United States pursuant to a prospectus filed as part of an effective registration statement on Form F-10 filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under the Canada/U.S. multi-jurisdictional disclosure system. After transaction costs of $3,180, including a 5% commission paid to the underwriters, the Group raised net proceeds of $45,887.

Page |  20

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

July 2016

In July 2016, the Group completed a private placement of 4,444,376 units in the capital of the Company, each unit comprising of one common share and one share purchase warrant, at a price of $0.45 per unit for gross proceeds of $2,000. Each share purchase warrant is exercisable into one common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021. The Group incurred $33 in issuance costs related to regulatory and legal fees. The Group apportioned the gross proceeds and issuance costs between share capital and warrants based on their relative fair values on date of issue. Accordingly, net proceeds of $1,264 was allocated to share capital and $703 to warrants.

June 2016

The Group completed a prospectus offering of 38,000,000 units in the capital of the Company at a price of $0.45 per unit for gross proceeds of approximately $17,100. Each Unit consisted of one common share and one common share purchase warrant, which entitles the holder to purchase an additional common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021. The Group incurred a total of $1,072 in issuance costs related to agents, advisory, regulatory and legal fees. The Group apportioned the gross proceeds and issuance costs between share capital and warrants based on the relative fair values of the common shares and warrants on date of issue. Accordingly, net proceeds of $10,347 was allocated to share capital and $5,683 to warrants.

(c) Share Purchase Warrants and Options not Issued under the Group’s Incentive Plan

The following tables reconciles warrants and non-employee options (options which are not issued under the Group’s incentive plan (note 7(d)), each exercisable to acquire one common share, for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 respectively:

			Year ended December 31, 2017
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date		Beginning Balance		Issued		Exercised			Expired			Ending Balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.37		July 23, 2017		18,800		–		(18,800	)		–			–
0.37		June 30, 2019		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.40		June 30, 2019		148,050		–		(100,000	)		–			48,050
0.37		March 10, 2021		9,400		–		–			–			9,400
0.40		March 10, 2021		82,250		–		–			–			82,250
0.37		December 15, 2021		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
0.40		December 12, 2022		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.29		December 8, 2024		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
Total				446,500		–		(118,800	)		–			327,700
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55		July 9, 2020		11,288,698		–		(4,163,052	)		–			7,125,646
3.00		September 14, 2017		2,871,676		–		(8,952	)		(2,862,724	)		–
Total				14,160,374		–		(4,172,004	)		(2,862,724	)		7,125,646
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65		June 10, 2021		39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Total				39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Grand Total				54,003,284		–		(15,829,001	)		(2,862,724	)		35,311,559

Page |  21

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

			Year ended December 31, 2016
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date	Beginning balance				Issued		Exercised	Expired	Ending balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.29	January 29, 2016			150,400		–		(150,400)	–	–
0.37	January 29, 2016			220,900		–		(61,100)	(159,800)	–
0.40	January 29, 2016			150,400		–		–	(150,400)	–
0.43	January 29, 2016			37,600		–		–	(37,600)	–
0.37	July 23, 2017			18,800		–		–	–	18,800
0.37	June 30, 2019			56,400		–		–	–	56,400
0.40	June 30, 2019			225,600		–		(77,550)2	–	148,050
0.37	March 10, 2021			9,400		–		–	–	9,400
0.40	March 10, 2021			150,400		–		(68,150)2	–	82,250
0.37	December 15, 2021			37,600		–		–	–	37,600
0.40	December 12, 2022			75,200		–		(18,800)	–	56,400
0.29	December 8, 2024			37,600		–		–	–	37,600
Total				1,170,300		–		(376,000)	(347,800)	446,500
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55	July 9, 2020				13,801,672	–		(2,512,974)	–	11,288,698
3.00	September 14, 2017				2,871,676	–		–	–	2,871,676
Total					16,673,348	–		(2,512,974)	–	14,160,374
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65	June 10, 2021				–		42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Total					–		42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Grand Total					17,843,648		42,444,376	(5,936,940)	(347,800)	54,003,284

Notes to tables:

1.	Pursuant to the acquisition of Cannon Point Resources Ltd. (“Cannon Point”) and Mission Gold Ltd. (“Mission Gold”) in October 2015 and December 2015 respectively, the Group exchanged options and warrants outstanding in these companies for options and warrants to purchase shares in the Company.
2.	The numbers have been revised to correct a disclosure error in 2016 as 56,400 options exercised were incorrectly allocated to options with an expiry of June 30, 2019 instead of options with an expiry of March 10, 2021. There was no impact on loss and loss per share.
3.	Refer to the 2016 prospectus and private placement financings in Note 7(b).

At December 31, 2017, warrants and non-employee options had a weighted average exercise price of $0.63 (December 31, 2016 – $0.75) and a weighted average remaining life of 3.26 years (December 31, 2016 – 4.05 years).

(d) Share Purchase Option Compensation Plan

The Group has a share purchase option plan approved by the Group’s shareholders that allows the Board of Directors to grant share purchase options, subject to regulatory terms and approval, to its officers, directors, employees, and service providers. The share purchase option plan (the “2017 Rolling Option Plan”) is based on the maximum number of eligible shares equaling a rolling percentage of up to 10% of the Company’s outstanding common shares including any issuances from the Group’s RSU and DSU plans, calculated from time to time. Pursuant to the 2017 Rolling Option Plan, if outstanding share purchase options (“options”) are exercised and the number of issued and outstanding common shares of the Company increases, then the options available to grant under the plan increase proportionately (assuming there are no issuances under the RSU and DSU plans). The exercise price of each option is set by the Board of Directors at the time of grant but cannot be less than the market price, being the 5-day volume weighted average trading price calculated the day before the grant. Options can have a maximum term of five years and typically terminate 90 days following the termination of the optionee’s employment or engagement. In the case of death or retirement, any outstanding vested options will expire the earlier of the expiry date or one year from date of death or retirement. The vesting period for options is at the discretion of the Board of Directors at the time the options are granted.

Page |  22

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

The following summarizes the Group’s options outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of options	Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)
Beginning balance		15,861,131			0.92		9,755,600			1.27
Granted		5,808,000			1.75		6,806,000			0.49
Expired		(508,100	)		2.88		(27,000	)		15.44
Exercised		(1,277,200	)		1.38		(548,869	)		0.92
Forfeited		(36,400	)		0.89		(38,000	)		0.50
Cancelled		–			–		(86,600	)		1.40
Ending balance		19,847,431			1.08		15,861,131			0.92

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group granted 133,200 (2016 – 150,000) options to consultants for advisory and administrative consulting services. The Group determined that given the nature of the services being provided and that are continued to be provided, it could not determine the fair value of these services reliably. As a consequence, the Group estimated that the value of these services approximated the fair value of the options granted measured using the Black-Scholes option pricing model which at December 31, 2017 amounted to $90 (2016 – $107).

For options granted in the year ended December 31, 2017, the weighted average fair value was estimated at $1.19 (2016 – $0.46) per option and was based on the Black-Scholes option pricing model using the following weighted average assumptions:

Assumptions	2017		2016
Risk-free interest rate		1.54%		0.54%
Expected life		4.51 years		4.73 years
Expected volatility 1		93.82%		82.89%
Grant date share price		$1.74		$0.67
Expected dividend yield		Nil		Nil

Note:

1. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s closing share price on the TSX.

Page |  23

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Details of options exercised during each year were as follows:

Year ended December 31, 2017
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
January 2017		502,200		1.60		3.70
February 2017		484,000		1.65		3.15
April 2017		15,000		0.89		2.03
May 2017		223,000		0.51		2.40
July 2017		10,000		0.50		1.78
September 2017		3,000		0.50		2.28
November 2017		40,000		0.50		2.56
		1,277,200		1.38		3.19

Year ended December 31, 2016
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
August 2016		10,000		0.49		0.96
September 2016		46,667		0.50		1.00
October 2016		60,000		0.50		0.97
November 2016		271,668		1.20		1.56
December 2016		160,534		0.74		2.44
		548,869		0.92		1.70

Page |  24

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

The following tables summarize information about the Group’s options as at December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Options outstanding	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		600,000		4.21
0.49		6,058,000		3.26		6,147,000		4.25
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		3,266,831		3.23
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,125,000		1.29		1,180,500		2.20
1.75		5,796,600		4.09		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		19,847,431		2.89		15,861,131		3.11

Options exercisable	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		200,000		4.21
0.49		4,001,340		3.26		2,009,670		4.28
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		2,074,676		3.27
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,099,998		1.29		1,113,498		2.22
1.75		1,936,000		4.08		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		13,905,169		2.51		10,064,644		2.61

(e) Deferred Share Units (“DSUs”)

The Group has a DSU plan approved by the Group’s shareholders in 2015 which allows the Board, at its discretion, to award DSUs to non-executive directors for services rendered to the Group and also provides that non-executive directors may elect to receive up to 100% of their annual compensation in DSUs. The aggregate number of DSUs outstanding pursuant to the DSU plan may not exceed 2% of the issued and outstanding common shares ("Shares") from time to time provided the total does not result in the total Shares issuable under all the Group’s share-based compensation plans (i.e. including Share purchase option and RSU plans) exceeding 10% of the total number of issued outstanding Shares. DSUs are payable when the non-executive director ceases to be a director including in the event of death. DSUs may be settled in Shares issued from treasury, by the delivery to the former director of Shares purchased by the Group in the open market, payment in cash, or any combination thereof, at the discretion of the Group.

In the year ended December 31, 2017, there were no new grants of DSUs. At December 31, 2017, a total of 458,129 DSUs were outstanding (2016 – 458,129).

Page |  25

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(f) Restricted Share Units (“RSUs”)

The Group’s RSU plan which was approved by the Group’s shareholders, allows the Board to grant employees, executive directors and consultants RSUs from time to time. The RSUs are granted conditionally and entitle the recipient to receive one share (or the cash equivalent) upon attainment of a time-based vesting period. The RSU plan limits the aggregate number of RSUs outstanding to 3% of the issued and outstanding Shares from time to time provided the total does not result in the total Shares issuable under all the Group’s share-based compensation plans (i.e. including Share purchase option and RSU plans) exceeding 10% of the total number of issued outstanding Shares. RSUs can be settled by the Group at its discretion in Shares issued from treasury, by the delivery of Shares purchased by the Group in the open market, payment in cash or in any combination thereof.

The following summarizes the Group’s RSUs outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of RSUs	Number of RSUs			Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)		Number of RSUs		Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)
Beginning Balance		639,031			0.69		–		–
Granted 2, 3		542,371			2.24		639,031		0.69
Cash-settled 1		(639,031	)		0.69		–		–
Withheld 3		(13,782	)		2.23		–		–
Shares issued 3		(22,094	)		2.23		–		–
Ending Balance		506,495			2.24		639,031		0.69

Notes

1.	On July 11, 2017, 639,031 RSUs granted to the Group’s Board Chair, Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) vested. The Group settled the equity obligation by making a cash payment of $1,098 based on the 5 day average of TSX closing prices for the Company’s common shares up to July 11, 2017 of $1.72 per RSU pursuant to the terms of the RSU Plan. This payment has been recognized as a decrease in the equity-settled share-based compensation reserve in equity (“SBC Reserve”). In the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $232 (2016 – $209) as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve.
2.	On July 27, 2017, the Group’s Compensation Committee approved a 2016 executive short term incentive bonus/compensation of $951 to the Group’s Board Chair, CEO and CFO payable through a combination of cash and RSUs. Of the total compensation, $190 was paid in cash with the balance paid by the grant of 434,742 RSUs. The RSUs have a one year term and vest on July 28, 2018. The Group has determined that this grant should be accounted for as cash-settled given the cash settlement of the previous grant to the same individuals (see 1 above). Accordingly, during the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $419 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in a RSU liability for this grant based on the TSX closing price of the Company’s common shares as of the reporting date. At the end of each reporting period, until the RSU liability is settled, the RSU liability’s fair value is remeasured based on the TSX closing price for common shares multiplied by the number of RSUs that will vest and be converted into common shares, and amortized over the vesting period of the RSUs, with any change in fair value charged to share-based compensation.
3.	On September 15, 2017, the Group granted 107,629 RSUs to the CEO of the Pebble Limited Partnership ("PLP CEO") with the following vesting terms: 1/3 vested on grant date; 1/3 vest 1 year from grant date; and 1/3 vest 2 years from grant date. The RSU terms also stipulate that settlement is to be paid out in common shares and the RSUs have a net settlement feature for withholding tax obligations. The Group has treated these RSUs in their entirety as equity-settled as a result of early adopting the amendments to IFRS 2 (note 2(p)). The fair value of the RSUs granted was $240 based on the TSX closing price for the Company’s shares at date of grant. With the first tranche of 35,876 RSUs that vested on date of grant, 13,782 RSUs were withheld to settle and pay the PLP CEO’s tax obligations of $30 and the balance of 22,094 RSUs were issued to the PLP CEO as common shares. The Group has recognized $115 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve during the year ended December 31, 2017.

Page |  26

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(g) Foreign Currency Translation Reserve

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Beginning balance	$	36,233		$	40,479
Foreign exchange translation differences incurred:
Loss on translation of foreign subsidiaries		(8,299	)		(4,246	)
Ending balance	$	27,934		$	36,233

The foreign currency translation reserve represents accumulated exchange differences arising on the translation of the results of operations and net assets of the Group’s subsidiaries with a US dollar functional currency into the Group’s presentation currency (the Canadian dollar).

8. RELATED PARTY BALANCES AND TRANSACTIONS

The components of transactions to related parties is as follows:

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Payables to related parties
Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (b)	$	540	$	240
Key management personnel (a)		93		–
RSU liability (a)		419		–
	$	1,052	$	240

Balances and transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries, which are related parties of the Company, have been eliminated on consolidation (note 2(c)). Details between the Group and other related parties are disclosed below:

(a) Transactions and Balances with Key Management Personnel (“KMP”)

The aggregate value of transactions with KMP, being the Group’s directors and officers including the Chief Financial Officer ("CFO"), Company Secretary, Senior Vice President ("SVP") Corporate Development, Vice President ("VP"), Corporate Communications, VP, Engineering and VP, Public Affairs, and Pebble Partnership ("PLP") senior management, the CEO, Executive VP, Public Affairs, SVP, Corporate Affairs, VP, Permitting and Chair of Pebble Mines Corp ("PMC Chair"), was as follows for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Transactions	2017		2016 5
Compensation
Amounts paid and payable to HDSI for services of KMP employed by HDSI 1	$	3,306	$	2,274
Amounts paid and payable to KMP 2		2,438		2,262
Bonuses paid to KMP 3		1,660		–
		7,404		4,536
Share-based compensation 4		4,650		2,428
Total compensation	$	12,054	$	6,964

Page |  27

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Notes to previous table:

1.	The Group’s CEO, CFO, Board Chair and senior management, other than disclosed in 2 below, are employed by the Group through Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (“HDSI”) (refer (b)).
2.	Represents short term employee benefits, including salaries and director’s fees paid and payable to the Group’s independent directors, PLP CEO, PMC Chair and PLP EVP, SVP and VP.
3.	Performance bonuses were paid to the PLP CEO for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years, incentive bonuses were paid or payable to the SVP, Corporate Development, VP, Engineering (payable to HDSI) and the PLP VP Permitting. In addition, the Group’s CEO and CFO were paid an incentive bonus/compensation for 2016.
4.	Includes cost of DSUs, RSUs and share purchase options issued during the period.
5.	In the year ended December 31, 2016, the amounts paid and payable to KMP have been revised to correct for a non-material disclosure omission. This omission had no effect on the Statement of Loss and Comprehensive Loss and loss and diluted loss per share.

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group settled vested KMP RSUs by making an aggregate cash payment of $1,098 (note 7(f)) (2016 – $nil) and 218,800 (2016 – Nil) options were exercised by KMP with a weighted average exercise price of $0.47 and a weighted average market price on exercise of $2.36 for proceeds to the Group of $103.

(b) Transactions and Balances with other Related Parties

Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. is a private company that provides geological, engineering, environmental, corporate development, financial, administrative and management services to the Group and its subsidiaries at annually set rates pursuant to a management services agreement. The annually set rates also include a component of overhead costs such as office rent, information technology services and general administrative support services. HDSI also incurs third party costs on behalf of the Group which are reimbursed by the Group at cost. Several directors and other key management personnel of HDSI, who are close business associates, are also key management personnel of the Group.

For the year ended December 31, 2017, and 2016, the aggregate value of transactions were as follows:

Transactions	2017		2016
Services rendered by HDSI:	$	5,219	$	3,584
Technical		2,329		1,157
Engineering		741		83
Environmental		736		375
Socioeconomic		699		660
Other technical services		153		39
General and administrative		2,890		2,427
Management, corporate communications, secretarial, financial and administration		2,225		1,908
Shareholder communication		665		519
Reimbursement of third party expenses		658		499
Conferences and travel		309		175
Insurance		62		54
Office supplies and information technology		287		270
Total value of transactions	$	5,877	$	4,083

Page |  28

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

9. TRADE AND OTHER PAYABLES

	December 31		December 31
Falling due within the year	2017		2016
Trade 1	$	10,268	$	1,260
Total	$	10,268	$	1,260
Non-current liabilities
Trade 1	$	6,650	$	-
Total	$	6,650	$	-

Notes:

1. Legal fees

As a result of the joint settlement with the EPA announced in May 2017, the Company’s legal counsel are due US$16,602 in additional legal fees of which US$15,867 is payable in three annual instalments of US5,289 and the balance of US$735 is payable within the year. The first annual instalment was paid in December 2017. The next two annual instalments of $6,650 (US$5,289) are payable in December 2018 and 2019 and have been included in current and non-current payables respectively. Of the balance of US$735, US$100 was paid in December 2017. The remaining balance of US$635 ($798) has been included in current payables.

10. BASIC AND DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE

The calculation of basic and diluted loss per share was based on the following for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

	2017		2016
Loss attributable to common shareholders	$	64,865	$	26,982
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (000s)		300,511		246,161

Page |  29

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

Diluted loss per share does not include the effect of 19,847,431 (2016 – 15,861,131) employee share purchase options outstanding, 35,311,559 (2016 – 54,003,284) non-employee share purchase options and warrants, 458,129 DSUs and 506,495 RSUs as they are anti-dilutive.

11. EMPLOYMENT COSTS

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recorded $16,342 (2016 – $10,626) in salaries and benefits, including share-based payments of $5,858 (2016 – $2,995) and amounts paid to HDSI for services provided to the Group by HDSI personnel (note 8(b)).

12. INCOME TAX EXPENSE

		Year ended December 31
		2017		2016
Current tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Current income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–

	Year ended December 31
Reconciliation of effective tax rate	2017			2016
Net loss	$	(64,865	)	$	(26,982	)
Total income tax (recovery) expense		–			–
Loss excluding income tax		(64,865	)		(26,982	)
Income tax using the Company’s domestic tax rate		(16,865	)		(7,015	)
Non-deductible expenses and other		(1,914	)		512
Change in tax rates		(2,950	)		–
Deferred income tax assets not recognized		21,729			6,503
	$	–		$	–

The Company’s domestic tax rate for the year was 26% (2016 – 26%).

	December 31			December 31
Deferred income tax assets (liabilities)	2017			2016
Tax losses	$	2,617		$	3,214
Net deferred income tax assets		2,617			3,214
Resource property/investment in Pebble Partnership		(2,472	)		(3,191	)
Equipment		(145	)		(23	)
Net deferred income tax liability	$	–		$	–

Page |  30

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

The Group had the following temporary differences at December 31, 2017 in respect of which no deferred tax asset has been recognized:

			Resource
Expiry	Tax losses		pools		Other
Within one year	$	–	$	–	$	–
One to five years		–		–		4,795
After five years		129,239		–		–
No expiry date		78		101,303		196
Total	$	129,317	$	101,303	$	4,991

The Group has taxable temporary differences in relation to investments in foreign subsidiaries or branches of $8.7 million (2016 – $7.8 million) which was not recognized because the Group controls the reversal of liabilities and it is expected it will not reverse in the foreseeable future.

13. FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT

The Group is exposed in varying degrees to a variety of financial instrument related risks. The Board approves and monitors the risk management processes, inclusive of documented investment policies, counterparty limits, and controlling and reporting structures. The type of risk exposure and the way in which such exposure is managed is provided as follows:

(a) Credit Risk

Credit risk is the risk of potential loss to the Group if a counterparty to a financial instrument fails to meet its contractual obligations. The Group’s credit risk is primarily attributable to its liquid financial assets, including cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and amounts receivable. The Group limits the exposure to credit risk by only investing its cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash with high-credit quality financial institutions in business and saving accounts, guaranteed investment certificates, and in government treasury bills which are available on demand by the Group when required. Amounts receivable (note 5) include receivable balances with government agencies and refundable deposits. The following is the Group’s maximum exposure:

	December 31		December 31
Exposure	2017		2016
Amounts receivable	$	487	$	138
Restricted cash		757		–
Cash and cash equivalents		67,158		7,196
Total exposure	$	68,402	$	7,334

(b) Liquidity Risk

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Group will not be able to meet its financial obligations when they become due. The Group ensures, as far as reasonably possible, it will have sufficient capital in order to meet short to medium term business requirements, after taking into account cash flows from operations and the Group’s holdings of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, where applicable. The Group’s cash and cash equivalents at the reporting date were invested in business and savings accounts and guaranteed investment certificates (note 6(a)).

The Group’s financial liabilities are comprised of trade and other payables (note 9) and payables to related parties (note 8), which are due for payment within 12 months from the reporting date, and non-current trade payables, which are due for payment more than 12 months from the reporting date. The carrying amounts of the Group’s financial liabilities represent the Group’s contractual obligations.

Page |  31

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

(c) Foreign Exchange Risk

The Company is subject to both currency transaction risk and currency translation risk: the Pebble Partnership, Pebble Services Inc. and U5 Resources Inc. have the US dollar as functional currency, and certain of the Company’s corporate expenses are incurred in US dollars. The operating results and financial position of the Group are reported in Canadian dollars in the Group’s consolidated financial statements. As a result the fluctuation of the US dollar in relation to the Canadian dollar will have an impact upon the losses incurred by the Group as well as the value of the Group’s assets and the amount of shareholders’ equity.

The Group has not entered into any agreements or purchased any instruments to hedge possible currency risks.

The exposure of the Group’s US dollar- denominated financial assets and liabilities to foreign exchange risk is as follows:

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Financial assets:
Amounts receivable	$	552		$	326
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash		60,083			2,232
		60,635			2,558
Financial liabilities: Trade and other payables		(16,845	)		(652	)
Net financial (liabilities) assets exposed to foreign currency risk	$	(43,790	)	$	1,906

Based on the above net exposures and assuming that all other variables remain constant, a 10% change in the value of the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar would result in a gain or loss of $4,379 (2016 – $191) in the year. This sensitivity analysis includes only outstanding foreign currency denominated monetary items.

(d) Interest Rate Risk

The Group is subject to interest rate cash flow risk with respect to its investments in cash and cash equivalents. The Group’s policy is to invest cash at fixed rates of interest and cash reserves are to be maintained in cash and cash equivalents in order to maintain liquidity, while achieving a satisfactory return for shareholders. Fluctuations in interest rates when cash and cash equivalents mature impact interest income earned.

Assuming that all other variables remain constant, a 100 basis points change representing a 1% increase or decrease in interest rates would have resulted in a decrease or increase in loss of $136 (2016 – $73).

(e) Capital Management

The Group’s policy is to maintain a strong capital base so as to maintain investor and creditor confidence and to sustain future development of the business. The capital structure of the Group consists of equity, comprising share capital and reserves, net of accumulated deficit. There were no changes in the Group’s approach to capital management during the year. The Group is not subject to any externally imposed capital requirements.

(f) Fair Value

The fair value of the Group’s financial assets and liabilities approximates the carrying amount.

Page |  32

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.

Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

For the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

(Expressed in thousands of Canadian Dollars, unless otherwise stated, except per share or option)

14.	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
(a)	Leases

The Group has the following commitments as of December 31, 2017:

	Less than   1 Year		Between 1  and   5 years		Later than 5 years		Total
Anchorage office lease 1	US$	179	US$	765	US$	–	US$	944
Pebble Project site leases 2		115		–		–		115
Total	US$	294	US$	765	US$	–	US$	1,059
Total in Canadian dollars 3	$	370	$	961	$	–	$	1,331

Notes:

1.	Lease which expires November 30, 2022.
2.	The Group has leases for a hangar at site and core storage. The hanger lease expires May 1, 2018 and the core yard lease expires June 1, 2018.
3.	Converted at the Wall Street Journal closing rate of $1.2573 per US$1 on December 31, 2017.

(b) Legal Proceedings

On February 14, 2017, short seller investment firm Kerrisdale Capital Management LLC published a negative piece (the "Kerrisdale Report") regarding the Pebble Project. Three putative shareholder class actions were filed against the Company and certain of its current officers and directors in US federal courts, specifically the Central District of California (Los Angeles) and the Southern District of New York (New York City). The cases are captioned: Diaz v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01241 (C.D. Cal.), Kirwin v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01238 (S.D.N.Y.) and Schubert v. Northern Dynasty Minerals, Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:17-CV-02437 (S.D.N.Y.). The complaints appear to rely on the claims made in the Kerrisdale Report and allege damages to a class of investors who purchased shares of the Company prior to the publication of the Kerrisdale Report and allege liability for losses pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 thereunder, as well as control person liability against the individual defendants pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The plaintiffs in both the Kirwin and Schubert actions voluntarily dismissed their claims without prejudice. The plaintiffs in the Diaz action continue to litigate and filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and the plaintiffs have filed a motion opposing the dismissal to which the Company replied in March 2018. The Company believes that the allegations in the existing complaint are without merit, and it intends to defend itself vigorously in the Diaz action.

Page |  33

EX-99.6

 

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2017

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Table of Contents

1.1	Date			3
1.2	Overview			6
	1.2.1	Pebble Project		7
		1.2.1.1	Project History	8
		1.2.1.2	Technical Programs	8
		1.2.1.3	Legal Matters	15
	1.2.2	Financing		21
	1.2.3	Market Trends		21
1.3	Selected Annual Information			22
1.4	Summary and Discussion of Quarterly Results			22
1.5	Results of Operations			23
1.6	Liquidity			26
1.7	Capital Resources			27
1.8	Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements			27
1.9	Transactions with Related Parties			27
1.10	Fourth Quarter			28
1.11	Proposed Transactions			28
1.12	Critical Accounting Estimates			28
1.13	Changes in Accounting Policies including Initial Adoption			28
1.14	Financial Instruments and Other Instruments			29
1.15	Other MD&A Requirements			30
	1.15.1	Disclosure of Outstanding Share Data		31
	1.15.2	Disclosure Controls and Procedures		31
	1.15.3	Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting		31
	1.15.4	Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting		32
	1.15.5	Limitations of Controls and Procedures		32
	1.15.6	Risk Factors		33

Page | 2

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.1 Date

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements (“Financial Statements”) of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (“Northern Dynasty” or the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2017 as publicly filed under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

The Company reports in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) and interpretations of the IFRS Interpretations Committee (together, ”IFRS”). The following disclosure and associated Financial Statements are presented in accordance with IFRS. This MD&A is prepared as of March 28, 2018.

All dollar amounts herein are expressed in thousands of Canadian dollars, unless otherwise specified.

This MD&A contains certain forward-looking information and forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws and forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements describe our future plans, strategies, expectations and objectives, and are generally, but not always, identifiable by use of the words “may”, “will”, “should”, “continue”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “believe”, “intend”, “plan” or “project” or the negative of these words or other variations on these words or comparable terminology.

Forward-looking statements contained or incorporated by reference into this MD&A include, without limitation, statements regarding:

● our expectations regarding the potential for securing the necessary permitting of a mine at the Pebble Project;

● the outcome of due diligence and negotiations to complete a partnering transaction;

● the outcome of any legal proceedings in which we are engaged;

● our ability to raise capital for the exploration and development activities;

● our expected financial performance in future periods;

● our plan of operations; and

● factors relating to our investment decisions.

Forward-looking information is based on the reasonable assumptions, estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date that such statements are made, but which may prove to be incorrect. We believe that the assumptions and expectations reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable.

Key assumptions upon which the Company’s forward-looking information are based include:

● that we will be able to secure sufficient capital necessary for continued environmental assessment and permitting activities and engineering work which must be completed prior to any potential development of the Pebble Project which would then require engineering and financing in order to advance to ultimate construction;

● that we will successfully complete a partnering transaction, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all approvals;

● that we will ultimately be able to demonstrate that a mine at the Pebble Project can be economically developed and operated in an environmentally sound and socially responsible manner, meeting all relevant federal, state and local regulatory requirements so that we will be ultimately able to obtain permits authorizing construction of a mine at the Pebble Project;

● that the market prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver will not significantly decline or stay depressed for a lengthy period of time;  

● that our key personnel will continue their employment with us; and

● that we will continue to be able to secure minimal adequate financing on acceptable terms.

Page | 3

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive of all factors and assumptions that may have been used. Forward-looking statements are also subject to risks and uncertainties facing our business, any of which could have a material impact on our outlook.

Some of the risks we face and the uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include:

● an inability to ultimately obtain permitting for a mine at the Pebble Project;

● an inability to establish that the Pebble Project may be economically developed and mined or contain commercially viable deposits of ore based on a mine plan for which government authorities are prepared to grant permits;

● an inability to complete a partnering transaction on terms satisfactory to the Company;

● an inability to continue to fund exploration and development activities and other operating costs;

● the highly cyclical and speculative nature of the mineral resource exploration business;

● the pre-development stage economic viability and technical uncertainties of the Pebble Project and the lack of known reserves on the Pebble Project;

● an inability to recover even the financial statement carrying values of the Pebble Project if we cease to continue on a going concern basis;

● the potential for loss of the services of key executive officers;

● a history of, and expectation of further, financial losses from operations impacting our ability to continue on a going concern basis;

● the volatility of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver prices and mining share prices;

● the inherent risk involved in the exploration, development and production of minerals, and the presence of unknown geological and other physical and environmental hazards at the Pebble Project;

● the potential for changes in, or the introduction of new, government regulations relating to mining, including laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and project legal titles;

● potential claims by third parties to titles or rights involving the Pebble Project;

● the possible inability to insure our operations against all risks;

● uncertainty related to litigation;

● the highly competitive nature of the mining business;

● the potential equity dilution to current shareholders from future equity financings; and

● that we have never paid dividends and will not do so in the foreseeable future.

While the effort was made to list the primary risk factors, this list should not be considered exhaustive of the factors that may affect any of our forward-looking statements or information. Forward-looking statements or information are statements about the future and are inherently uncertain, and actual achievements of the Company or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements or information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, the risks and uncertainties described above and otherwise contained herein.

Our forward-looking statements and risk factors are based on the reasonable beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date of this MD&A. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There is no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Accordingly, readers should appreciate the inherent uncertainty of, and not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. We do not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except as, and to the extent required by, applicable securities laws.

For more information on the Company, investors should review the Company’s annual information form and home jurisdiction filings that are available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

The Company reviews its forward-looking statements on an ongoing basis and updates this information when circumstances require it.

Page | 4

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured and Indicated Resources

The following section uses the terms “measured resources” and “indicated resources”. The Company advises investors that although those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize them. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves.

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Inferred Resources

The following section uses the term “inferred resources”. The Company advises investors that although this term is recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize it. “Inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of a mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of economic studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

Page | 5

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.2 Overview

Northern Dynasty is a mineral exploration company which, through subsidiaries, holds a 100% interest in mining claims that are part of or in the vicinity of the Pebble Copper-Gold-Molybdenum-Silver Project (the “Pebble Project” or “Pebble”) in southwest Alaska, USA (“US”). The Company’s business in Alaska is operated through the Pebble Limited Partnership (the “Pebble Partnership”), a wholly-owned Alaskan registered limited partnership.

The Pebble Project is an initiative to develop one of the world’s most important mineral resources. The current mineral resources, as estimated at a 0.30% copper equivalent (CuEQ)¹ cut-off grade comprise:

● 6.456 billion tonnes in the combined Measured and Indicated categories at a grade of 0.40% copper, 0.34 g/t gold, 240 ppm molybdenum and 1.7 g/t silver, containing 57 billion pounds of copper, 71  million ounces of gold, 3.4 billion pounds of molybdenum and 345 million ounces of silver; and

● 4.454 billion tonnes in the Inferred category at a grade of 0.25% copper, 0.25 g/t gold, 226 ppm molybdenum and 1.2 g/t silver, containing 25 billion pounds of copper, 36 million ounces of gold, 2.2  billion pounds of molybdenum and 170 million ounces of silver.

In 2017, Northern Dynasty advanced its near-term goals, enabling the Company to progress the Pebble Project toward development. On May 12, 2017, the Company announced that the Pebble Partnership and the US Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) had reached a settlement agreement (the “joint settlement agreement”) with respect to the longstanding legal dispute over a pre-emptive regulatory action for the Pebble Project under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”, also described below as the “Proposed Determination” under Section 1.2.1.3 Legal Matters). Under the terms of the joint settlement agreement:

● the EPA agreed the Pebble Project can proceed into normal course permitting under the CWA and National Environmental Policy Act, and that it cannot seek to utilize its authority under CWA 404(c) until such time as a final Environmental Impact Statement has been completed by the US Army Corps of Engineers, so long as that occurs within a period of four years following the settlement agreement, and that Pebble Partnership files permit applications within 30 months of the date of the joint settlement agreement.  EPA further agreed to initiate a process to consider withdrawing the Proposed Determination it issued under CWA 404(c) in July 2014.  In January 2018, EPA announced that it had suspended the process to withdraw the preemptive regulatory action but will continue to support Pebble’s due process rights and right to proceed with permitting as agreed to in the 2017 joint settlement agreement; and

● the Pebble Partnership agreed to terminate each of the legal actions it brought against EPA since 2014, including the action under the Federal Advisory Committee Act; an action challenging EPA’s statutory authority under the Clean Water Act; and an action under the Freedom of Information Act.  

A copy of the joint settlement agreement is posted under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and EDGAR at www.sec.gov.

Once the joint settlement agreement was in place, Northern Dynasty refocused its efforts toward securing a project partner(s) with the financial resources to substantially contribute to permitting, building and operating a mine at Pebble. The Company also advanced a comprehensive program of engineering and environmental studies, field investigations and related technical studies to develop the documentation necessary to initiate federal and state permitting. Important progress has been made.

¹ Mineral resources at December 2017 as estimated by David Gaunt, PGeo, a qualified person who is not independent of Northern Dynasty. For additional details, see section 1.2.1.2 below or the Company’s 2017 Annual Information Form and 2018 Technical Report, both of which are filed at www.sedar.com.

Page | 6

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

On December 18, 2017, the Company announced that it has entered into a framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (“First Quantum”), which contemplates that an affiliate of First Quantum may subsequently execute an option agreement with Northern Dynasty. The option agreement contemplates an option payment of US$150 million staged over four years, which will entitle First Quantum to acquire the right to earn a 50% interest in the Pebble Partnership for US$1.35 billion. The option period may be extended for up to 2 years by First Quantum making payments to be agreed upon, and which amounts will be offset against the US$1.35 billion additional investment amount. First Quantum’s entry into the option agreement is contingent on the completion of due diligence, necessary regulatory approvals and the successful negotiation of the final form of the option agreement and associated commercial agreements. First Quantum has made a non-refundable early option payment of US$37.5 million to be applied solely for the purpose of progressing the permitting of the Pebble Project².

On December 22, 2017, the Pebble Partnership filed for a US Clean Water Act 404 permit with the US Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE” or the “Corps”), initiating federal permitting for the Pebble Project under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). On January 5, 2018, the Pebble Partnership received notice from USACE that the Clean Water Act 404 permitting documentation was accepted and that an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) would be required to comply with its NEPA review of the Pebble Project. In February, USACE advised the Pebble Partnership that it had selected AECOM, an experienced and global, integrated engineering, environmental, construction and infrastructure development firm as third-party contractor to support them in completing an EIS for the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty’s main focus in 2018 will be to finalize the option agreement and support, through the Pebble Partnership, development of an EIS and advance the permitting process. The Pebble Partnership team in Anchorage Alaska office has been supplemented with experienced engineering and permitting staff to liaise with the USACE and oversee the necessary field programs and technical studies for the EIS.

Corporate

As at December 31, 2017, the Company has $67.2 million in cash and cash equivalents for its operating requirements. Of this amount, $47.1 million relates to the early option payment received by the Company from First Quantum which is to be used solely on permitting by the Pebble Partnership. As such, the Company has prioritized the allocation of the remaining available financial resources in order to meet key corporate expenditure requirements in the near term. Although the Company will seek financing as necessary to advance its programs, there can be no assurances that it will be successful in obtaining additional financing. If the Company is unable to raise the necessary capital resources to meet obligations as they come due, the Company will at some point have to reduce or curtail its operations.

1.2.1 Pebble Project

The Pebble property (“Pebble”) is located in southwest Alaska, approximately 17 miles from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles southwest of the city of Anchorage. Situated in an area of rolling hills approximately 1,000 feet above sea-level and 60 miles from tidewater on Cook Inlet, the site conditions are favorable for successful mine site and infrastructure development.

²The likelihood of a partnering transaction is subject to risks related to the satisfactory completion of due diligence and negotiations, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all necessary approvals. Such process may not be successfully completed or completed on terms satisfactory to Northern Dynasty.

Page | 7

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.2.1.1 Project History

The Pebble deposit was discovered in 1987 by a prior operator, which by 1997 had developed an initial outline of the deposit.

Northern Dynasty acquired the right to earn an interest in the Pebble property in 2001. Exploration since that time has led to significant expansion of the mineral resources in the Pebble deposit, including a substantial volume of higher grade mineralization in its eastern part. The deposit also remains open to further expansion at depth and to the east. A number of other occurrences of copper, gold and molybdenum have also been identified along the extensive northeast-trending mineralized system that underlies the property. The potential of these earlier-stage prospects has not yet been fully explored.

Comprehensive deposit delineation, environmental, socioeconomic and engineering studies of the Pebble deposit began in 2004. More recently, a Preliminary Assessment of the Pebble Project was completed in 2011, which provided insights into the size and scale of project that the Pebble resource might support. The Pebble Partnership continued to undertake detailed engineering, environmental and socioeconomic studies over the next two years. In February 2014, the US EPA announced a pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA to consider restriction or a prohibition of mining activities associated with the Pebble deposit.

From 2014-2017, Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership focused on a multi-dimensional strategy, including legal and other initiatives (see section 1.2.1.3) to ward off this action. These efforts were successful, resulting in the joint settlement agreement announced on May 12, 2017 (see section 1.2.1.3, Joint Settlement Agreement). In the latter part of 2017, a project design was developed to take the Pebble Project into permitting. An application for a US Clean Water Act 404 (“CWA 404”) permit was submitted on December 22, 2017, and accepted by USACE in early January 2018, initiating federal permitting for the Pebble Project under NEPA.

From 2001, when Northern Dynasty’s involvement at the Pebble Project began, to December 31, 2017, a total of $837 million (US$775 million) has been invested to advance the project.³

1.2.1.2 Technical Programs

Work in 2017 was directed toward finalizing a development design concept and the necessary documentation to initiate state and federal permitting.

³ Of this, approximately $595 million (US$573 million) was provided by a wholly-owned subsidiary of Anglo American plc which participated in the Pebble Partnership from 2007 to 2013, and the remainder was financed by Northern Dynasty. A major part of the 2007-2013 expenditures were on exploration, resource estimation, environmental data collection and technical studies, with a significant portion spent on engineering of possible mine development models, as well as related infrastructure, power and transportation systems. The mine-site and infrastructure studies completed are not necessarily representative of management’s current understanding of the most likely development scenario for the Project, and accordingly, Northern Dynasty is uncertain whether it can realize significant value from this prior work. Environmental baseline studies and data, as well as geological and exploration information, remain important information available to the Company to advance the Project.

Page | 8

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Engineering

Office and field studies were conducted to investigate and advance/update the project design, including:

● smaller mine concepts, including site layouts and waste management facilities;

● alternate ore treatment options;

● alternate tailings storage facility designs, including water management schemes and lined PAG⁴ storage;

● water treatment plants and development of surplus water release strategies;

● transportation corridor to the south of Lake Iliamna, including road and ferry options;

● facilities associated with the transportation corridor, including ferry landing sites;

● a port facility on Cook Inlet, southeast of Lake Iliamna, at the terminus of the transportation corridor; and

● a natural gas-fired power plant and associated gas pipeline.

2017 Field Program

Additional data was collected in the field to support the project design, with specific focus on the proposed transportation corridor, including:

● a geophysical survey to ascertain the subsurface conditions at the proposed port site on Cook Inlet;

● bathymetric surveys at the proposed port site on Cook Inlet and the proposed ferry landings on the north and south side of Lake Iliamna;

● aerial photography to extend the digital mapping to the complete transportation corridor; and

● reconnaissance of the proposed transportation corridor to identify alternatives that minimize environmental and social impacts; and instrumentation was fabricated and installed to collect additional ocean data at the port site.  

Environmental and Socioeconomic

Environmental Baseline Document and Supplemental Environmental Baseline Document

The 27,000-page Environmental Baseline Document (“EBD”) for the Pebble Project was released to the public in January 2012. The purpose of the EBD and Supplemental EDB (see further details below) is to provide the public, regulatory agencies and the Pebble Partnership with a detailed compendium of pre-development environmental and socioeconomic conditions in the project area. The EBD is based on extensive environmental baseline data that has been collected since 2004 with the goal to design and plan a project that protects clean water, healthy fish and wildlife populations, and other natural resources in the region. The work was conducted by more than 40 respected independent research firms, utilizing over 100 scientific experts and engineering groups, laboratories and support services. Researchers were selected for their specific areas of expertise and Alaskan experience, with cooperating government agencies participating in several studies. Information for the EBD was gathered through field studies, laboratory tests, review of government records and other third-party sources, and interviews with Alaska residents.

The 2012 EBD characterizes a broad range of environmental and social conditions in southwest Alaska – including climate, water quality, wetlands, fish and aquatic habitat, wildlife, land and water use, socioeconomics and subsistence activities during the period 2004-2008 and from some disciplines in 2009. The EBD study is available at http://pebbleresearch.com/.

⁴ Potentially Acid Generating material

Page | 9

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The full range of data from 2009-2013 period was compiled as part of the 2017 program, and will be presented in the Supplemental EBD (2009 to 2013), which is currently in progress.

2017 Field Program

The 2017 environmental field program was designed to collect additional multidisciplinary environmental baseline data for proposed infrastructure, such as access routes, port and ferry landing sites to characterize the existing conditions for engineering design and permitting purposes. Wetland polygon mapping was also conducted of the proposed mine site and off-site infrastructure areas.

Other

The Pebble environmental team also provided multi-disciplinary scientific input to the engineering design team to optimize transportation corridor alignments while avoiding/minimizing routes in critical habitat areas, and finalize the site water balance and strategic water release plan to protect downstream fish habitat; to prepare the CWA 404 permit application submission to the USACE; and to assist the Public Affairs team with their stakeholder outreach program.

All the 2017 technical work was directed toward preparation and submission of the NEPA permitting application package, which was submitted to USACE in December 2017. The permitting package includes a Project Description, Alternatives Assessment, Mitigation Plan and Reclamation and Closure Plan.

Other Technical Studies

The following information is mainly summarized from the “2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA”, effective date December 22, 2017 by David Gaunt, PGeo, James Lang, PGeo, Eric Titley, PGeo, Ting Lu, PEng, and Stephen Hodgson, PEng, (“2018 Technical Report”) which is available under Northern Dynasty’s profile at www.sedar.com.

Project Description

The Project Description in the permit application envisages the Pebble deposit being developed as an open pit mine, with associated on and off-site infrastructure, including:

● a 230 megawatt power plant located at the mine site;

● an 83-mile transportation corridor from the mine site to a port site on the west side of Cook Inlet;

● a permanent, year-round port facility near the mouth of Amakdedori Creek on Cook Inlet; and,

● a 188-mile natural gas pipeline from the Kenai Peninsula to the Pebble Project site.

Following four years of construction activity, the proposed Pebble mine will operate for a period of 20 years. This includes 14 years of mining using conventional drillblast-shovel operations, followed by six years of milling material from a low-grade ore stockpile. The mining rate will average 90 million tons per year, with 58 million tons of mineralized material going through the mill each year (160,000 tons per day), for a life-of-mine waste to mineralized material ratio of 0.1:1.

Page | 10

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The development proposed in Pebble’s Project Description is substantially smaller than previous iterations, and presents significant new environmental safeguards, including:

● a development footprint less than half the size previously envisaged;

● the consolidation of most major site infrastructure in a single drainage (the North Fork Koktuli), and the absence of any primary mine operations in the Upper Talarik drainage;

● a more conservative Tailings Storage Facility (“TSF”) design, including enhanced buttresses, flatter slope angles and an improved factor of safety;

● separation of potentially acid generating (“PAG”) tailings from non-PAG bulk tailings for storage in a fully-lined TSF;

● no permanent waste rock piles; and

● no secondary gold recovery plant (no cyanide usage).

The NEPA EIS process requires a comprehensive ‘alternatives assessment’ be undertaken to consider a broad range of development alternatives and, as such, the final project design and operating parameters for the Pebble Project and associated infrastructure may vary significantly from the proposed project described in the Project Description.

The EIS process will consider alternative scenarios with respect to a number of aspects of the proposed project. The Company will need to assess and study all of the proposed alternatives that the USACE will be considering as part of the scoping process conducted during the initial phase of the EIS so that an economic analysis can be completed after examination of all the alternatives.

The project proposed as envisaged in the Project Description uses a portion of the currently estimated Pebble mineral resources. This does not preclude development of additional resources in other phases of the project in the future. Any future phases of development are expected to require comprehensive review by federal, state and local regulatory agencies, including a discrete EIS permitting process under NEPA.

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing⁵

Metallurgical testwork for the Pebble Project was initiated by Northern Dynasty in 2003 and continued to 2013. Metallurgical testwork and associated analytical procedures were performed by recognized testing facilities with extensive experience with these analyses, with this type of deposit, and with the Pebble Project. The samples selected for testing were representative of the various types and styles of mineralization present at the Pebble deposit. The test results on variability samples derived from 103 lock cycle flotation tests (“LCT”) indicate that marketable copper (Cu Con) and molybdenum (Mo Con) concentrates can be produced with gold and silver contents that meet or exceed payable levels in representative smelter contracts.

Metal recoveries used for the previous resource estimate (December 2014) were based on the LCT results of the variability samples, and associated gold leach testwork. This has been updated since secondary recovery using cyanide is not part of the project plan currently advancing through permitting. The flotation tests on composite samples indicate a general increase of metal recoveries when the primary grind size is reduced. Thus, a finer primary grind size (P80 125µm) was incorporated into the metal recovery projection model. The following table provides projected metals recoveries via flotation concentration for metals and a gravity circuit for gold. These recoveries were used for the December 2017 resource estimate.

⁵ Terminology used in this section:

Hypogene: Processes which occur below the earth's surface and, in mineral deposits, result in precipitation of primary minerals like sulphides.

Locked Cycle Test: A repetitive batch flotation test used in mineral processing laboratories while developing a metallurgical flowsheet.

Supergene: Processes which occur relatively near the surface of the earth and modify or destroy original (hypogene) minerals by oxidation and chemical weathering.

Page | 11

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Projected Metallurgical Recoveries

Domain	Flotation Recovery %
	Cu Con, 26% Cu			Mo Con
	Cu	Au	Ag	Mo
Supergene:
Sodic Potassic	78.7	63.6	67.5	53.9
Illite Pyrite	72.1	46.5	67.8	66.3
Hypogene:
Illite Pyrite	89.8	45.6	66.6	76.1
Sodic Potassic	90.1	63.2	67.0	80.1
K Silicate	93.7	63.6	66.5	85.4
QP	94.7	65.2	64.4	80.4
Sericite	89.6	40.6	66.5	75.9
QSP	89.8	32.9	66.9	86.1

Domains are name based on silicate mineralogy within alteration zones.

Illite Pyrite zone has significant amounts of illite (clay mineral) and pyrite (iron sulphide mineral).

K Silicate zone has significant potassium (K) bearing silicate minerals.

Potassic zone with potassium-bearing minerals such as biotite, muscovite or sericite, and/or orthoclase.

QSP is zone with significant Quartz Sericite Pyrite.

Sericite zone has significant sericite, a fine-grained version of muscovite.

Sodic Potassic zone has significant sodium (Na) and potassium (K) bearing minerals.

Sodic zone contains sodium-bearing minerals, most commonly albite feldspar.

Mineral Resource

The current mineral resource, as tabulated below, was estimated using ordinary kriging by David Gaunt, PGeo, a qualified person who is not independent of Northern Dynasty. The effective date of the estimate is December 22, 2017.

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured and Indicated Resources

This section uses the terms, “measured resources” and “indicated resources”. The Company advises investors that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) does not recognize them. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves.

Page | 12

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Mineral Resources – Measured and Indicated Categories

Threshold CuEq %	CuEq%	Tonnes	Cu (%)	Au (g/t)	Mo (ppm)	Ag (g/t)	Cu Blb	Au Moz	Mo Blb	Ag Moz
Measured
0.3	0.65	527,000,000	0.33	0.35	178	1.7	3.83	5.93	0.21	28.1
0.4	0.66	508,000,000	0.34	0.36	180	1.7	3.81	5.88	0.20	27.4
0.6	0.77	279,000,000	0.40	0.42	203	1.8	2.46	3.77	0.12	16.5
1.0	1.16	28,000,000	0.62	0.62	302	2.3	0.38	0.56	0.02	2.0
Indicated
0.3	0.77	5,929,000,000	0.41	0.34	246	1.7	53.58	64.81	3.21	316.4
0.4	0.82	5,185,000,000	0.45	0.35	261	1.8	51.42	58.35	2.98	291.7
0.6	0.99	3,455,000,000	0.55	0.41	299	2.0	41.88	45.54	2.27	221.1
1.0	1.29	1,412,000,000	0.77	0.51	343	2.4	23.96	23.15	1.07	109.9
Measured + Indicated
0.3	0.76	6,456,000,000	0.40	0.34	240	1.7	56.92	70.57	3.42	344.6
0.4	0.81	5,693,000,000	0.44	0.35	253	1.8	55.21	64.06	3.18	320.3
0.6	0.97	3,734,000,000	0.54	0.41	291	2.0	44.44	49.22	2.40	237.7
1.0	1.29	1,440,000,000	0.76	0.51	342	2.4	24.12	23.61	1.08	112.0

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Inferred Resources

This section also uses the term “inferred mineral resources”. The Company advises investors that while this term is recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize it. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of a mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of economic studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

Mineral Resources – Inferred Category

Threshold CuEq %	CuEq%	Tonnes	Cu (%)	Au (g/t)		Mo (ppm)		Ag (g/t)		Cu Blb		Au Moz		Mo Blb	Ag Moz
Inferred
0.3	0.55	4,454,000,000	0.25		0.25		226		1.2		24.54	35.80	2.22			170.4
0.4	0.68	2,646,000,000	0.33		0.30		269		1.4		19.24	25.52	1.57			119.1
0.6	0.89	1,314,000,000	0.48		0.37		292		1.8		13.90	15.63	0.85			75.6
1.0	1.20	361,000,000	0.68		0.45		377		2.3		5.41	5.22	0.30			26.3

Notes: These resource estimates have been prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 and the CIM Definition Standards. Inferred Mineral Resources are considered to be too speculative to allow the application of technical and economic parameters to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the project.

Copper equivalent (“CuEq”) calculations use metal prices of $1.85/lb for copper, $902/oz for gold and $12.50/lb for molybdenum, and recoveries of 85% for copper 69.6% for gold, and 77.8% for molybdenum in the Pebble West zone and 89.3% for copper, 76.8% for gold, 83.7% for molybdenum in the Pebble East zone. The tabulation is based on a CuEq that incorporates the contribution of copper, gold and molybdenum. Although the estimate includes silver, it was not used as part of the CuEq calculation in order to facilitate comparison with previous estimates which did not consider the silver content or its potential economic contribution.

Contained metal calculations are based on 100% recoveries.

A 0.30% CuEq cut-off is considered to be appropriate for porphyry deposit open pit mining operations in the Americas.

Page | 13

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

All mineral resource estimates, cut-offs and metallurgical recoveries are subject to change as a consequence of more detailed analyses that would be required in pre-feasibility and feasibility studies.

Community Engagement

Pebble Project technical programs are supported by stakeholder engagement activities in Alaska. The objective of stakeholder outreach programs undertaken by the Pebble Partnership are to:

● advise residents of nearby communities and other regional interests about Pebble work programs and other activities being undertaken in the field;

● provide information about the proposed development plan for the Pebble Project, including potential environmental, social and operational effects, proposed mitigation and environmental safeguards;

● allow the Pebble Partnership to better understand and address stakeholder priorities and concerns with respect to development of the Pebble Project;

● encourage stakeholder and public participation in the USACE-led EIS permitting process for Pebble; and

● facilitate economic and other opportunities associated with advancement and development of the Pebble Project for local residents, communities and companies.

In addition to meeting with stakeholder groups and individuals, and providing project briefings in communities throughout Bristol Bay and the State of Alaska, the Pebblre Partnership’s outreach and engagement program includes:

● workforce and business development initiatives intended to enhance economic opportunities for regional residents and Alaska Native corporations;

● initiatives to develop partnerships with Alaska Native corporations, commercial fishing interests and other in-region groups and individuals;

● outreach to elected officials and political staff at the national, state and local levels;

● outreach to third-party organizations and special interest groups with an interest in the Pebble Project, including business organizations, community groups, outdoor recreation interests, Alaska Native entities, commercial and sport fishery interests, conservation organizations, among others; and

● ongoing meetings of the Pebble Project Advisory Committee, a group comprised of prominent Alaskan and national figures assembled in 2017 to provide independent, external advice on the Pebble Project as it advances into federal and state permitting.

Through these vaious stakeholder initiatives, the Company seeks to advance a science-based project design that is responsive to stakeholder priorities and concerns, provides meaningful benefits and opportunities to local residents, businesses and Alaska Native village corporations, and energizes the economy of Southwest Alaska.

Plans for 2018

As mentioned in the Overview, Northern Dynasty’s main focus in 2018 will be to finalize the option agreement with First Quantum and support, through the Pebble Partnership, development of an EIS in order to advance the permitting process.

Page | 14

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.2.1.3 Legal Matters

Joint Settlement Agreement

From 2014-2017, Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership were focused on a multi-dimensional strategy that included legal and other initiatives designed to ward off a pre-emptive regulatory action by the EPA under the Clean Water Act. The strategy had a successful outcome.

On May 12, 2017, Northern Dynasty announced that the Pebble Partnership and the EPA had reached a joint settlement agreement over the federal agency’s pre-emptive regulatory action. Key aspects of the agreement include:

● The EPA agreed the Pebble Project can proceed into normal course permitting under the CWA and NEPA, and that it cannot seek to utilize its authority under CWA 404(c) until such time as a final EIS has been completed by the USACE, so long as that occurs within a period of four years following the settlement agreement, and that the Pebble Partnership files permit applications within 30 months of the date of the settlement agreement.  

● EPA further agreed to initiate a process to consider withdrawing the Proposed Determination it issued under CWA 404(c) in July 2014.  The beginning of this process was announced on July 11, 2017, and a public comment period concluded on October 17, 2017.  EPA suspended this process in January 2018 (see discussions below under “Proposed Determination”).

● The Pebble Partnership agreed to terminate permanently and with prejudice three lawsuits it brought against EPA: an action under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, an action challenging EPA’s authority under the CWA; and an action under the Freedom of Information Act.  

A copy of the joint settlement agreement is posted under the Company’s SEDAR and EDGAR profiles at www.sedar.com and www.sec.gov, respectively.

The following is a chronology of the events and the actions and initiatives by Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership that ultimately led to the joint settlement agreement.

Environmental Protection Agency and Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment

In February 2011, the EPA announced it would undertake a Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment study focusing on the potential effects of large-scale mine development in Bristol Bay and, specifically the Nushagak and Kvichak area drainages. This process was ostensibly initiated in response to calls from persons and groups opposing the Pebble Project for the EPA to pre-emptively use its asserted authority under Section 404(c) of the CWA to prohibit discharges of dredged or fill material in waters of the US within these drainages. However, evidence exists that the EPA may have been considering a Section 404(c) veto of the Pebble Project at least as far back as 2008 – two years before it received a petition from several Alaska Native tribes.

The EPA’s first draft Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment (“BBWA”) report was released on May 18, 2012. In the Company’s opinion after review with its consultants, the draft report is a fundamentally flawed document. By the EPA’s own admission, it evaluated the effects of a “hypothetical project” that has neither been defined nor proposed by the Pebble Partnership, and for which key environmental mitigation strategies have not yet been developed and, hence, would not yet be known. It is believed by the Company that the assessment was rushed – because it was based on studies conducted over only one year in an area of 20,000 square miles. In comparison, the Pebble Project has studied the ecological and social environment surrounding Pebble for over a decade. The EPA also failed to adequately consider the comprehensive and detailed data that the Pebble Partnership provided as part of its 27,000-page Environmental Baseline Document.

Page | 15

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The EPA called for public comment on the quality and sufficiency of scientific information presented in the draft BBWA report. In response, the Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty made submissions on the draft report. Northern Dynasty made a presentation highlighting these shortcomings at public hearings held in Seattle, Washington, on May 31, 2012 and in Anchorage, Alaska, on August 7, 2012. In July 2012, the Company also submitted a 635-page critique of the draft report in response to the EPA’s call for public comment, and called upon the EPA to cease such unwarranted actions until such time as a definitive proposal for the development of the Pebble deposit is submitted into the NEPA permitting process.

Concerns about the reasonableness of the basis of risk assessment in the draft EPA report were stated by many of the independent experts on the peer review panel assembled to review the BBWA, as summarized, in a report entitled External Peer Review of EPA’s Draft Document: An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska released in November 2012. In a wide-ranging critique of the draft report’s methodology and findings, many peer review panellists called the EPA’s effort to evaluate the effects of a “hypothetical mining scenario” on the water, fish, wildlife and cultural resources of Southwest Alaska ”inadequate”, ”premature”, ”unreasonable”, “suspect” and “misleading”.

On April 26, 2013, the EPA released a revised draft of the BBWA report and announced another public comment and Peer Review period. The Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty made submissions on the revised draft. In late May 2013, Northern Dynasty filed a 205-page submission which describes the same major shortcomings as the original report published in May 2012.

In mid-January 2014, the EPA released the final version of its BBWA. The report still reflects many of the same fundamental shortcomings as previous drafts.

On February 28, 2014, the EPA announced the initiation of a pre-emptive regulatory action under Section 404(c) of the CWA to consider restriction or a prohibition on mining activities associated with the Pebble deposit in order to protect aquatic resources in southwest Alaska. In late April 2014, the Pebble Partnership submitted a comprehensive response to the EPA’s February 28, 2014 notification letter.

Statutory Authority action

In late May 2014, the Pebble Partnership filed suit in the US District Court for Alaska and sought an injunction to halt the pre-emptive regulatory action initiated by the EPA under the CWA, asserting that, in the absence of a permit application, the action exceeds the federal agency’s statutory authority and violates the Alaska Statehood Act among other federal laws. The State of Alaska and Alaska Peninsula Corporation, an Alaska Native village corporation with extensive land holdings in the Pebble Project area, later joined in the Pebble Partnership’s lawsuit against the EPA as co-plaintiffs. On September 26, 2014, a US federal court in Alaska granted the EPA’s motion to dismiss the case. This ruling did not judge the merits of the statutory authority case, it only deferred that hearing and judgment until after a final Section 404(c) determination has been made by the EPA. The Company also appealed the decision to grant the motion to dismiss to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This appeal was denied in May 2015. The Pebble Partnership retained the option to pursue its statutory authority case in the instance that EPA finalized a pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA, but this right was waived under the terms of the joint settlement agreement.

Page | 16

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Proposed Determination

On July 18, 2014, EPA Region 10 announced a “Proposed Determination” to restrict the discharge of dredged or fill material associated with mining the Pebble deposit in a 268 square mile area should that disposal result in any of the following: loss of five or more miles of streams with documented salmon occurrence; loss of 19 or more miles of streams where salmon are not documented but that are tributaries of streams with documented salmon occurrence; the loss of 1,100 or more acres of wetlands, lakes, and ponds that connect with streams with documented salmon occurrence or tributaries of those streams; and stream flow alterations greater than 20 percent of daily flow in nine or more linear miles of streams with documented salmon occurrence. Northern Dynasty management did not accept that the EPA has the statutory authority to impose conditions on development at Pebble, or any development project anywhere in Alaska or the US, prior to the formal submission of a development plan and its thorough review by federal and state agencies including development of an Environmental Impact Statement and review under NEPA.

On September 19, 2014, the Pebble Partnership submitted a comprehensive legal and technical response to EPA Region 10’s Proposed Determination. Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership maintained that the Proposed Determination is flawed and unsupported by the administrative record as established by the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment, and was therefore arbitrary and capricious.

As part of the settlement agreement announced on May 12, 2017, EPA agreed to initiate a process to withdraw the Proposed Determination that would have restricted the development of the Pebble Project. The beginning of this process was announced on July 11, 2017, and a public comment period concluded on October 17, 2017. On January 29, 2018, the Company announced that it acknowledged a statement issued by the EPA on January 26, 2018, indicating that the federal agency will continue to support Pebble’s due process rights agreed to in the settlement agreement to allow for normal course permitting although it has suspended the process to consider the withdrawal of the pre-emptive regulatory action initiated under CWA 404(c) in July 2014.

Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) action

On September 3, 2014, the Pebble Partnership initiated a second action against EPA in federal district court in Alaska charging that EPA violated the FACA due to the federal agency’s close interactions with, and the undue influence of Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations and anti-mining activists in developing the BBWA, and with respect to its unprecedented pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA. On September 24, 2014, the US federal court judge in Alaska released an order recognizing that the EPA agreed not to take the next step to advance its 404(c) regulatory action with respect to southwest Alaska’s Pebble Project until at least January 2, 2015.

Preliminary Injunction

On November 24, 2014, a US federal court judge in Alaska granted the Pebble Partnership’s request for a preliminary injunction in relation to the FACA case. While the preliminary injunction did not resolve the Pebble Partnership’s claims that the EPA actions with respect to the BBWA and subsequent 404(c) regulatory action violated FACA, the decision permitted the further discovery process of the underlying facts to enable the court to issue a final decision on the merits of the FACA case. Granting of a preliminary injunction also reflected the court’s view that PLP had a likelihood of prevailing on the merits of its case. On June 4, 2015, the federal court in Alaska issued an order denying the EPA’s motion to dismiss this case.

Page | 17

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The Pebble Partnership filed numerous requests for production of documents and received tens of thousands of documents produced by the EPA. The Pebble Partnership also served a number of notices of depositions for current and former EPA employees, EPA contractors and relevant third parties. More than a dozen depositions of EPA witnesses were completed. Additionally, the Pebble Partnership had asked the Court to compel the Agency and certain third parties to produce documents relevant to its FACA claims that are being improperly withheld. Had the Pebble Partnership prevailed in its FACA litigation against the EPA, the federal agency may have been unable to rely upon the BBWA as part of the administrative record for any regulatory action at the Pebble Project.

On October 27, 2016, the Pebble Partnership and the EPA filed a joint Notice in federal court stating their intent to enter into mediation in an effort to resolve ongoing litigation under FACA.

The Pebble Partnership and the EPA filed several joint Notices in federal court to stay the ongoing FACA litigation between December 30, 2016 and May 11, 2017, although the Court’s November 2014 Preliminary Injunction remained in effect. During this period, the Pebble Partnership and the EPA engaged in direct discussions, which led to the joint settlement agreement announced on May 12, 2017.

Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) action

On October 14, 2014, the Pebble Partnership filed suit in federal district court in Alaska charging that EPA has violated the FOIA by improperly withholding documents related to the Pebble Project, the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment and consideration of a pre-emptive 404(c) veto under the CWA. The EPA moved for summary judgment claiming that its search for and disclosure of documents was adequate. The Pebble Partnership opposed the government’s motion, pointing out several deficiencies in the EPA’s search parameters and the agency’s overly broad assertion of the deliberative process privilege to withhold documents. On August 24, 2015, the US federal court judge granted in part and deferred in part the EPA’s motion for summary judgement on the FOIA litigation. The court accepted the EPA’s position that it had made an adequate search for documents but left the matter open should the EPA not meet its obligations in the FACA litigation or if additional documents surface. Additionally, the judge ordered EPA to produce a sample of 183 partially or fully withheld documents so that it could conduct an in-camera review of the sample and test the merits of EPA’s withholdings under the deliberative process privilege. Before producing this sample to the Court, EPA chose to voluntarily release 115 documents (or 63% of the sample ordered by the Court), relinquishing its claim of privilege as to these documents.

In briefings before the Court, the Pebble Partnership argued that the voluntary release of 63% of the agency’s same documents conclusively demonstrated that the EPA had been over broad in its assertion of the deliberative process privilege, particularly because the content of the voluntarily released documents was not in fact deliberative. The Court agreed, finding that EPA “improperly withheld documents in full,” and that “many of the documents that defendant released should have been released to begin with because the portions that defendant released were not deliberative.”  It then ordered the EPA to review an additional 65 documents. Of these 65 documents, the EPA voluntarily released 55 documents in whole or in part (or 85% of the documents). Given the EPA’s high rate of release, the Pebble Partnership submitted a brief to the Court arguing that the EPA should be forced to review the remaining documents being withheld and arguing that judgment should not be granted to the agency at this time.  The Court agreed, concluding that it had “no confidence that [EPA] has properly withheld documents, either in full or in part, pursuant to the deliberative process privilege.” The Court reiterated its earlier finding that EPA had been withholding documents that “should never have been withheld to begin with.” As a result, the Court ordered the Agency to re-evaluate all remaining documents EPA is withholding in response to the Pebble Partnership’s January 2014 FOIA request and to submit these documents for in-camera review. After this review, the Court issued an order resolving Pebble’s challenges to the remaining withholdings and forcing EPA, yet again, to produce additional documents that the agency had been improperly withholding for over two years.

Page | 18

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Office of the EPA Inspector General (“OIG”) review

Counsel for Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership submitted numerous letters to the independent OIG since January 2014, raising concerns of apprehension of bias, process irregularities and undue influence by environmental organizations in the EPA’s preparation of the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment. In response to Congressional and other requests, on May 2, 2014, the OIG announced that it would investigate the EPA’s conduct in preparing An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska, “to determine whether the EPA adhered to laws, regulations, policies and procedures in developing its assessment of potential mining impacts in Bristol Bay, Alaska.” On January 13, 2016, the OIG published its report (the “OIG Report”). While acknowledging significant “scope limitations” in its review and subsequent OIG Report, the OIG concluded that: “we found no evidence of bias in how the EPA conducted its assessment of the Bristol Bay watershed, or that the EPA pre-determined the assessment outcome,” but that an EPA Region 10 employee may have been guilty of “a possible misuse of position.”

Several other investigations of EPA conduct at Pebble contradict the OIG Report. The US Congress’ House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found “that EPA employees had inappropriate contact with outside groups and failed to conduct an impartial, fact-based review of the proposed Pebble mine.” In addition, a report by former United States Senator and Defense Secretary William S. Cohen and his firm (further described below), said their investigation “raise(s) serious concerns as to whether EPA orchestrated the process to reach a pre-determined outcome; had inappropriately close relationships with anti-mine advocates; and was candid about its decision-making process.”

The findings of the OIG Report did not materially affect the Pebble Partnership’s strategy for addressing the EPA’s CWA Section 404(c) regulatory action. The Company remained confident that the Pebble Project would ultimately enter federal and state permitting unencumbered by any extraordinary development restrictions, a belief borne out by the joint settlement agreement reached with EPA in May 2017.

Cohen report

In March 2015, William Cohen and his firm, The Cohen Group, assisted by the law firm DLA Piper, was retained by the Pebble Partnership to conduct an independent review of whether the EPA acted fairly in connection with its evaluation of potential mining in the Bristol Bay watershed. Secretary Cohen was requested to evaluate the fairness of EPA’s actions and decisions in this matter based upon a thorough assessment of the facts and relying on his experience as a senior government official, as well as his 24 years as a member of the US Senate and House of Representatives.

A team of independent investigators employed by The Cohen Group and DLA Piper reviewed thousands of documents secured through FOIA requests and interviewed approximately 60 individuals involved with the EPA or its review of the Pebble Project. On October 6, 2015, Mr. Cohen released his report entitled Report of an Independent Review of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Actions in Connection with its Evaluation of Potential Mining in Alaska’s Bristol Bay Watershed. The report stated the conclusion of Mr. Cohen that he did not believe the EPA used the “fairest and most appropriate process” in its proposed pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA.

Mr. Cohen urged policymakers to require that the permitting process under NEPA and the regulations developed by the Council on Environmental Quality (the “Permit/NEPA Process”) be followed. Mr. Cohen commented that the Permit/NEPA Process is more comprehensive than the pre-emptive Section 404(c) action employed by the EPA and he could find no valid reason why that process was not used.

Page | 19

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The Cohen report also raised a number of concerns about the EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment study and the CWA Section 404(c) regulatory action, including possible prejudice and pre-determination of outcomes by the EPA, inappropriately close relationships between certain EPA officials and anti-mine advocates, EPA’s candor with respect to certain actions it took, lack of consistency between the BBWA and the proposed determination, and lack of cooperation by EPA personnel with respect to Congressional queries and FOIA requests.

Northern Dynasty does not consider the Cohen report to constitute an “expert’s” report but rather considers it to constitute an informed view of the Company’s treatment by the EPA expressed by a person familiar with governmental due process goals. Mr. Cohen also appeared before a Congressional committee (House Committee on Science, Space and Technology) with respect to the findings in his report.

US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology

On February 22, 2017, the US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Chairman, Lamar Smith, sent a letter to the EPA Administrator Scott Pruit recommending that “the incoming Administration rescind the EPA’s proposed determination to use Section 404(c) in a pre-emptive fashion for the Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska. This simple action would allow a return to the long-established CWA permitting process and stop attempts by the EPA to improperly expand its authority. Moreover, it would create regulatory certainty for future development projects that will create jobs and contribute to the American economy.”

On March 7, 2018, Chairman of the US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Lamar Smith, Chairman of the US House Natural Resources Committee, Rob Bishop, and Chairman of the US Congressional Western Caucus, Paul Grossman, sent a joint letter to the EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt expressing “serious concerns” about the federal agency’s January 26, 2018 announcement that it had suspended the process to withdraw the CWA 404(c) proposed determination initiated at the Pebble Project in July 2014. The joint letter recommended that “EPA clearly states that in the event that the scoping process undertaken by the Corps addresses all of the major issues identified in the 2014 proposed determination, that the EPA will withdraw the determination.” The letter further states that “Using the Corps EIS process to inform the decision on the proposed determination will allow a return to the long-established Clean Water Act permitting process, enforcing the principles of due process and rule of law.”

Other Matters

On February 14, 2017, short seller investment firm Kerrisdale Capital Management LLC published a negative piece (the “Kerrisdale Report”) regarding the Pebble Project. Three putative shareholder class actions were filed against the Company and certain of its current officers and directors in US federal courts, specifically the Central District of California (Los Angeles) and the Southern District of New York (New York City). The cases are captioned: Diaz v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01241 (C.D. Cal.); Kirwin v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01238 (S.D.N.Y.); and Schubert v. Northern Dynasty Minerals, Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:17-CV-02437 (S.D.N.Y.). The complaints appear to rely on the claims made in the Kerrisdale Report and allege damages to a class of investors who purchased shares of the Company prior to the publication of the Kerrisdale Report and allege liability for losses pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 thereunder, as well as control person liability against the individual defendants pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.

The plaintiffs in both the Kirwin and Schubert actions voluntarily dismissed their claims without prejudice. The plaintiffs in the Diaz action continue to litigate and filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and the plaintiffs have filed a motion opposing the dismissal to which the Company replied in March 2018. The Company believes that the allegations in the remaining complaint are without merit, and it intends to defend itself vigorously in the Diaz action.

Page | 20

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

For further information, refer to the Company’s 2017 Annual Information Form which is filed under the Company’s profile on www.sedar.com.

1.2.2 Financing

US$37,444 Bought Deal

In January 2017, the Company completed a bought deal offering of 20,240,000 common shares at a price of US$1.85 per unit for gross proceeds of approximately US$37,440. The offering was made through a syndicate of underwriters co-led by Cantor Fitzgerald Canada Corporation, TD Securities Inc. and BMO Capital Markets.

Part of the net proceeds were used to advance the Company’s Multi-dimensional Strategy to address the pre-emptive regulatory action of the EPA under Section 404 (c) of the CWA and the balance will be used for (i) preparations to initiate federal and state permitting under NEPA; (ii) environmental monitoring, engineering and environmental studies, field investigations and related technical studies to finalize a proposed development plan for the Pebble Project; (iii) enhanced outreach and engagement with political and regulatory offices in the Alaska state and U.S. federal government and among Alaska Native partners and broader regional and state-wide stakeholder groups; (iv) Alaskan corporate, tenure and site maintenance; (v) general corporate purposes; and (vi) working capital requirements.

1.2.3 Market Trends

Copper prices were variable in 2013, 2014 and 2015, and the average annual price decreased each year. Prices were variable to improving for most of 2016, 2017 and so far in 2018. A recent closing price is US$2.99/lb.

In 2013, an uptrend in gold prices that had extended over several years came to an end. Prices were variable from 2013 to 2015, and the average annual prices decreased. Gold prices trended upward for most of 2016, with a drop late in the year. Prices have shown some variability, but trended upward in 2017. Gold prices dropped in late 2017, then rebounded in January 2018, and have been variable since that time. A recent closing price is US$1,332/oz.

Molybdenum prices weakened in 2012 and 2013. Prices increased from January to August 2014, then began a downtrend that continued to the end of 2015. Prices improved in the first half of 2016, then dropped slightly and, largely, have been flat since that time, with a recent price of US$11.79/lb.

Silver prices were buoyant, ranging between $26/oz and $35/oz between October 2011 and the end of 2012, then trended downward in 2013.  Prices were variable in 2014 and 2015, with the average annual prices decreasing in both years.  Prices were variable to increasing during most of 2016, but dropped late in the year.  In 2017, silver prices were variable, tracking gold for the first four months, before taking a dip and rebound similar to gold in December 2017/January 2018. Prices have been variable to decreasing since that time. A recent price is US$16.46/oz.

Average annual prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver for the past four years as well as the average prices so far in 2018 are shown in the table below:

Year	Average metal price 1
	Copper US$/lb	Gold US$/oz	Molybdenum US$/lb	Silver US$/oz
2013	3.32	1,410	10.40	23.80
2014	3.14	1,276	11.91	19.08
2015	2.49	1,160	6.73	15.68
2016	2.21	1,251	6.56	17.14
2017	3.22	1,272	7.26	16.49
2017 (to the date of this MD&A)	3.01	1,340	11.34	16.55

1. Source: LME Official Cash Price as provided at www.metalprices.com

Page | 21

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.3 Selected Annual Information

The following selected annual information is from the audited consolidated financial statements which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS. Unless otherwise stated, all monetary amounts are expressed in thousands of Canadian dollars except per share amounts, which are expressed in Canadian dollars.

	Fiscal year		Fiscal year			Fiscal year
	2017		2016			2015
Total assets	$	202,620	$	150,347		$	157,704
Total non-current liabilities	$	53,799	$	–		$	–
Total current liabilities	$	11,320	$	1,500		$	2,724
Exploration and evaluation expenses	$	22,594	$	7,935		$	8,718
General and administrative expenses		9,384		6,729			8,272
Legal, accounting and audit		26,358		9,442			17,001
Share-based compensation		5,858		2,995			903
Other items 1		671		(119	)		(1,065	)
Loss for the year	$	64,865	$	26,982		$	33,829
Basic and diluted loss per common share	$	0.22	$	0.11		$	0.23
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (‘000’)		300,511		246,161			146,313

Notes

1. Other items include interest income and expense, exchange gain or loss, other income, amounts written off and deferred income tax.

1.4 Summary and Discussion of Quarterly Results

All monetary amounts are expressed in thousands of dollars except per share amounts and where otherwise indicated. Minor differences are due to rounding.

Excerpts from Statements of Comprehensive Loss (Income)	Dec 31 2017			Sep 30 2017		Jun 30 2017		Mar 31  2017			Dec 31  2016			Sep 30  2016			Jun 30  2016			Mar 31 2016
Expenses
Exploration and evaluation	$	7,078		$	9,807	$	3,929	$	1,780		$	2,610		$	2,006		$	1,294		$	2,025
General and administrative		2,099			1,980		2,757		2,548			1,311			1,444			1,844			2,130
Legal, accounting and audit 1		1,351			1,475		22,227		1,305			984			1,286			3,318			3,854
Share-based compensation		1,319			3,474		558		507			714			1,939			186			156
Other items 2		(464	)		1,152		712		(729	)		(95	)		(68	)		(54	)		98
Loss for the quarter	$	11,383		$	17,888	$	30,183	$	5,411		$	5,524		$	6,607		$	6,588		$	8,263
Basic and diluted loss per common share	$	0.04		$	0.06	$	0.10	$	0.02		$	0.02		$	0.02		$	0.03		$	0.04
Weighted average number of common shares (000s)		306,004			303,962		301,220		290,650			266,767			264,622			230,920			222,106

1.

Legal costs in 2016 to Q2 2017 incurred primarily to respond to EPA’s potential veto on the Pebble Project. In Q2, 2017, following the settlement with the EPA, additional legal fees became payable (see discussion below). As well from Q1 2017, the Company incurred legal costs in response to the Kerrisdale Report and securities class actions (discussed in “Other Matters” under 1.2.1.3 Legal Matters).

2.

Other items include interest income and expense, exchange gain or loss, gain or loss on disposal of financial assets and plant and equipment.

Page | 22

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Discussion of Quarterly Trends

Exploration and evaluation expenses (“E&E”) increased each quarter from Q2 2017 to Q3 2017 as the Company initiated a program of engineering and environmental studies, field investigations and related technical studies with the objective of finalizing a proposed development plan and preparing documentation for federal and state permitting. The CWA 404 permit application was submitted in Q4 2017. In Q3 2017, the Company also recorded the annual claim rental fees payable as compared to the prior years where those fees were recorded in the last quarter of the year. In the prior year, E&E trended down each quarter other than in the last quarter when the Company paid its annual claim rental fees. Other than annual fees for claims, E&E includes costs for Native community engagement, select environmental monitoring programs, site leases, land access agreements and technical studies undertaken.

General and administrative expenses (“G&A”) have fluctuated based on the level of corporate and financing activities undertaken and trended down from Q1 2016 but increased in 2017. In Q1 and Q2 2017, G&A included the costs of discretionary bonuses paid relating to the 2015 and 2016 fiscal periods respectively as well as a performance bonus relating to the completion of the bought deal financing. In Q3 2017, the Group paid a short-term incentive bonus/compensation to its Board’s Chair, CEO and CFO, which was settled 20% in cash and 80% in restricted share units.

Legal, accounting and audit expenses increased significantly in Q2 2017 as the Company recorded additional legal fees payable of approximately US$15,800 following the settlement agreement with the EPA (refer Section 1.2.1.3, Joint Settlement Agreement). In 2017, the Company also incurred approximately US$1,761 in legal costs relating to the Company’s response to the Kerrisdale Report including securities class actions.

Share-based compensation expense (“SBC”) has fluctuated due to the timing and quantum of share purchase option (“option”) grants and the vesting periods associated with these grants. Grants of options occurred in Q3 2017 (5,808,000 options), Q3 2016 (6,206,000 options), Q1 2016 (600,000 options). Grants of deferred share units (“DSUs”) and restricted share units (“RSUs”) also impacted SBC. There were grants in Q3 2017 of 542,371 RSUs and in Q3 2016 of 639,031 RSUs and 458,129 DSUs.

1.5 Results of Operations

The following financial data has been prepared from the Financial Statements for the three months and the year ended December 31, 2017, and is expressed in thousands of Canadian dollars unless otherwise stated.

The Company’s operations and business are not driven by seasonal trends, but rather are driven towards the achievement of project milestones relating to the Pebble Project such as the achievement of various technical, environmental, socio-economic and legal objectives, including obtaining the necessary permits, the completion of pre-feasibility and final feasibility studies, preparation of engineering designs, as well as receipt of financings to fund these objectives along with mine construction.

Page | 23

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.5.1 Results of Operations – Three months and Year ended December 31, 2017 versus 2016

For the three months, the Company recorded an increase in loss of $5,859 due primarily to the increases in E&E of $4,468, G&A of $788, and the increase in SBC of $605.

For the year, the Company recorded an increase in loss of $40,538 due primarily to the increases in legal, accounting and audit expenses ($16,916), E&E ($14,659), SBC ($2,863) and G&A ($2,655).

Exploration and evaluation expenses

The breakdown of E&E for the three months and year as compared to 2016 is as follows:

E&E	Three months				Year
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Engineering	$	1,262	$	16	$	3,602	$	282
Environmental		2,890		194		5,260		732
Property fees		2		1,351		1,340		1,351
Site activities		661		228		3,886		1,298
Socio-economic		1,847		798		6,581		4,186
Transportation		240		–		1,480		–
Other activities and travel		176		23		445		86
Total	$	7,078	$	2,610	$	22,594	$	7,935

In the current quarter, E&E increased by $4,468 as the Company continued and completed a site field program including engineering and environmental programs (see 1.2.1.2 Technical Programs) which culminated in the submission of a CWA 404 permit application. Transportation costs increased as the Company employed helicopter charters for the field program. Property fees decreased due to timing as the Company recorded the annual claims rentals in the third quarter of 2017. Additional costs were incurred relating to the ongoing Alaska Native community engagement and stakeholder outreach programs (see 1.2.1.2, Community Engagement).

In the year 2017, E&E increased as a result of the site field program, engineering and environmental programs (1.2.1.2 Technical Programs), cost of helicopter charters for the field program and the ongoing Alaska Native community engagement and stakeholder outreach.

Page | 24

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

General and administrative expenses

The following table provides a breakdown of G&A, and legal, accounting and audit expenses incurred in the three months and year as compared to 2016:

	Three months				Year
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Conference and travel	$	200	$	75	$	507	$	366
Consulting		210		18		742		388
Insurance		112		101		427		417
Office costs, including information technology		290		223		960		875
Management and administration		1,035		716		5,395		3,842
Shareholder communication		205		137		1,050		634
Trust and filing		47		41		303		207
Total G&A		2,099		1,311		9,384		6,729
Legal, accounting and audit		1,351		984		26,358		9,442
	$	3,450	$	2,295	$	35,742	$	16,171

G&A increased by $788 in the current quarter due primarily to an increase in consulting fees incurred and an increase in management and administration costs, due to the Company paying director fees and an increase in corporate activities. Legal, accounting and audit cost increased by $367 due in part to the Company’s response to the Kerrisdale Report and securities class actions.

For the year, G&A increased by $2,655 due primarily to the increase in management and administration costs, shareholder communication costs and consulting costs. Management and administration included payments for discretionary bonuses in respect to the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years paid to the Pebble Partnership CEO and a 2017 bonus/compensation to the Company’s board Chair, CEO and CFO. Shareholder communication increased due to higher costs incurred to hold the annual general meeting in June 2017 and additional costs for updating the Company’s website. Legal, accounting and audit costs increased by $16,916 as the Company recognized additional legal fees payable to legal counsel as a result of the joint settlement agreement reached by the Pebble Partnership and the EPA (see 1.6 Liquidity and 1.2.1.3 Joint Settlement Agreement) and incurred fees as the Company responded to the Kerrisdale Report and securities class actions.

Other

SBC has fluctuated due to the timing and quantum of option grants, RSUs and DSUs and the vesting periods associated with these grants. In both 2017 and 2016, the Company issued grants of options and DSUs/RSUs in the third quarter (2017 – 5,808,000 options and 542,371 RSUs; 2016 – 6,206,000 options, 458,129 DSUs and 639,031 RSUs). In Q1 2016, the Company also issued 600,000 options.

1.5.2 Financial position as at December 31, 2017 versus December 31, 2016

The total assets of the Company increased by $52,273 due largely to the increase in cash and cash equivalents as a result of the completion of the bought deal financing, the receipt of the early option payment from First Quantum, and proceeds from the exercise of options and warrants during the year.

Page | 25

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.6 Liquidity

The Company’s major sources of funding has been the issuance of equity securities for cash, primarily through private placements and prospectus offerings to sophisticated investors and institutions, and the issue of common shares pursuant to the exercise of options and warrants. The Company’s access to financing is always uncertain. There can be no assurance of continued access to significant equity funding.

As at December 31, 2017, the Company had cash and cash equivalents of $67,158 which represents an increase of $59,962 from December 31, 2016 as the Company completed a bought deal financing (refer 1.2.2 Financing), received the early option payment of US$37,500 ($47,149) from First Quantum late in December 2017, and received $11,620 from the exercise of options and warrants during the year. The Company employed $43,019 in its operating activities in year ended December 31, 2017. The Company is requied to utilize the non-refundable early option funds solely for permitting related expenditures at the Pebble Project. The Company has prioritized the allocation of its remaining available financial resources to meet key corporate expenditure requirements in the near term. Additional financing may be required to progress any material expenditures at the Pebble Project in 2018 if no formal agreement is entered into by the Pebble Partnership and First Quantum and for working capital. There can be no assurances that the Company will be successful in obtaining additional financing at that point. If the Company is unable to raise the necessary capital resources to meet obligations as they come due, the Company will have to reduce or curtail its operations at some point.

At December 31, 2017, the Company had working capital of $56,832 as compared to $6,375 at December 31, 2016. The Company has no capital lease obligations, operating leases or any other long-term obligations other than those disclosed below:

The following commitments and payables existed at December 31, 2017:

			Payments due by period as of the reporting date
	Total		≤ 1 year		1-5 years		> 5 years
Trade and other payables 1	$	10,268	$	10,268	$	–	$	–
Payables to related parties		633		633		–		–
Lease commitments		1,331		370		961		–
Long-term payables 1		6,650		–		6,650		–
Total	$	18,882	$	11,271	$	7,611	$	–

Notes to table

1.

As a result of the joint settlement agreement between the Company and the EPA in May 2017, the Company’s legal counsel are due US$16,602 in additional legal fees (“success fees”) of which US$15,867 is payable in three annual instalments of US$5,289 and the balance of US$735 is payable within the year.  The first annual instalment was paid in December 2017.  The next two instalments are payable in December 2018 and 2019 respectively.  Of the balance of US$735, US$100 was paid in December 2017.

2.

US dollar amounts have been converted at the year end rate of $1.2573 / US dollar.

The Company has no “Purchase Obligations”, defined as any agreement to purchase goods or services that is enforceable and legally binding on the Company that specifies all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased; fixed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing of the transaction. The Company is responsible for maintenance payments on the Pebble Project claims and routine site and office leases (included in table above).

Page | 26

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.7 Capital Resources

The Company’s capital resources consist of its cash reserves, which include its cash and equivalents. As at December 31, 2017, other than noted in 1.6 Liquidity, the Company has no other long-term debt and no commitments for material capital expenditures.

The Company has no lines of credit or other sources of financing.

1.8 Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As at December 31, 2017, the Company had no off-balance sheet arrangements.

1.9 Transactions with Related Parties

Transactions with Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (“HDSI”)

Hunter Dickinson Inc. (“HDI”) and its wholly owned subsidiary, HDSI are private companies established by a group of mining professionals engaged in advancing and developing mineral properties for a number of private and publicly-listed exploration companies, one of which is the Company.

Current directors of the Company namely Robert Dickinson and Ron Thiessen are active members of the HDI Board of Directors. Marchand Snyman, the Company’s CFO, is also an active member of the HDI Board of Directors. Other key management personnel of the Company – Doug Allen, Stephen Hodgson, Bruce Jenkins, Sean Magee and Trevor Thomas – are active members of HDI’s senior management team.

The business purpose of the related party relationship

HDSI provides technical, geological, corporate communications, regulatory compliance, administrative and management services to the Company, on an as-needed and as-requested basis from the Company.

HDSI also incurs third party costs on behalf of the Company. Such third party costs include, for example, directors and officers insurance, travel, conferences, and technology services.

As a result of this relationship with HDSI, the Company has ready access to a range of diverse and specialized expertise on a regular basis, without having to engage or hire full-time experts. The Company benefits from the economies of scale created by HDSI.

The measurement basis used

The Company procures services from HDSI pursuant to an agreement (the “Services Agreement”) dated July 2, 2010 whereby HDSI agreed to provide technical, geological, corporate communications, administrative and management services to the Company. A copy of the Services Agreement is publicly available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

Services from HDSI are provided on a non-exclusive basis as required and as requested by the Company. The Company is not obligated to acquire any minimum amount of services from HDSI. The fees for services is determined based on an agreed upon charge-out rate for each employee performing the service and the time spent by the employee. The charge-out rate also includes overhead costs such as office rent, information technology services and administrative support. Such charge-out rates are agreed and set annually in advance.

Third party expenses are billed at cost, without any markup.

Page | 27

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Ongoing contractual or other commitments resulting from the related party relationship

There are no ongoing contractual or other commitments resulting from the Company’s transactions with HDSI, other than the payment for services already rendered and billed. The agreement may be terminated upon 60 days’ notice from either party.

Transactions during the Reporting Period and Balances with HDSI at the end of the Reporting Period

Disclosure as to transactions with HDSI and any amounts due to or from HDSI is provided in Note 8(b) in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements which accompany this MD&A and which are available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

Key Management Personnel

The required disclosure for the remuneration of the Company’s key management personnel is provided in Note 8(a) in the notes to the Interim Financial Statements which accompany this MD&A and which are available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

1.10 Fourth Quarter

Discussed in Section 1.5.1 Results of Operations – Three months and Year ended December 31, 2017 versus 2016

1.11 Proposed Transactions

There are no proposed asset or business acquisitions or dispositions, other than those in the ordinary course, before the Board of Directors for consideration.

The Company has signed a framework agreement with First Quantum which contemplates that an affiliate of First Quantum may subsequently execute an option agreement with the Group. The option agreement contemplates an option payment of US$150 million staged over four years which will entitle First Quantum to acquire the right to earn a 50% interest in the Pebble Partnership for US$1.35 billion. First Quantum’s entry into the option agreement is contingent upon the completion of due diligence, obtaining necessary regulatory approvals and the successful negotiation of the final form of the option agreement and associated commercial agreements.

1.12 Critical Accounting Estimates

The required disclosure is provided in Note 2 in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements which accompany this MD&A and which are available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

1.13 Changes in Accounting Policies including Initial Adoption

The required disclosure is provided in Note 2 in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements which accompany this MD&A and which are available under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

Page | 28

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.14 Financial Instruments and Other Instruments

The Company is exposed in varying degrees to a variety of financial instrument related risks. The Board approves and monitors the risk management processes, inclusive of documented investment policies, counterparty limits, and controlling and reporting structures. The type of risk exposure and the way in which such exposure is managed is provided as follows:

Credit Risk

Credit risk is the risk of potential loss to the Company if a counterparty to a financial instrument fails to meet its contractual obligations. The Company’s credit risk is primarily attributable to its liquid financial assets, including cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, some of which is held in business accounts, guaranteed investment certificates, government treasury bills, and amounts receivable. The Company limits the exposure to credit risk by only investing with high-credit quality financial institutions in business and saving accounts, guaranteed investment certificates, and in government treasury bills, which are available on demand by the Group as and when required or mature in timeframes appropriate to the needs of the Company. There has been no change in the Company’s objectives and policies for managing this risk except for changes in the carrying amounts of financial assets exposed to credit risk, and there was no significant change to the Company’s exposure to credit risk during the year ended December 31, 2017. Amounts receivable include receivable balances with government agencies, prepaid expenses and refundable deposits. Management has also concluded that there is no objective evidence of impairment to the Company’s amounts receivable.

Liquidity Risk

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Company will not be able to meet its financial obligations when they become due. There has been no change in the Company’s objectives and policies for managing this risk. The Company’s liquidity position is discussed further in Section 1.6 Liquidity.

Foreign Exchange Risk

The Company is subject to both currency transaction risk and currency translation risk: the Pebble Partnership, Pebble Services Inc. and U5 Resources Inc. have the US dollar as functional currency; and certain of the Company’s corporate expenses are incurred in US dollars. The fluctuation of the US dollar in relation to the Canadian dollar has an impact upon the losses incurred by the Company as well as the value of the Company’s assets and total shareholders’ equity as the Company’s functional and presentation currency is the Canadian dollar. The Company has not entered into any agreements or purchased any instruments to hedge possible currency risks at this time.

There has been no change in the Company’s objectives and policies for managing this risk, except for the changes in the carrying amounts of the financial assets exposed to foreign exchange risk. During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company completed a bought deal financing in US dollars (refer 1.2.2 Financing), has recognized additional legal fees payable in US dollars and received an early option payment in US dollars. As a result, the Company’s exposure to foreign exchange risk has increased as follows:

Page | 29

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

	December 31			December 31
US dollar denominated financial assets and liabilities	2017			2016
Financial assets:
Amounts receivable	$	552		$	326
Restricted Cash		757			–
Cash and cash equivalents		59,326			2,232
		60,635			2,558
Financial liabilities:
Long term payables		(6,650	)		–
Payables to related parties		(93	)		–
Trade and other payables		(10,102	)		(652	)
		(16,845	)		(652	)
Net financial (liabilities) assets exposed to foreign currency risk	$	43,790		$	1,906

Based on the above net exposures and assuming that all other variables remain constant, a 10% change in the value of the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar would result in a gain or loss, expressed in thousands, of $4,379 (December 31, 2016 – $191) in the period reported. This sensitivity analysis includes only outstanding foreign currency denominated monetary items.

Interest rate risk

The Company is subject to interest rate risk with respect to its investments in cash and cash equivalents. There has been no change in the Company’s objectives and policies for managing this risk and no significant change to the Company’s exposure to interest rate risk during the year ended December 31, 2017.

Commodity price risk

While the value of the Company’s Pebble Project is related to the price of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver and the outlook for these minerals, the Company currently does not have any operating mines and hence does not have any hedging or other commodity based risks in respect of its operational activities.

Copper, gold, molybdenum and silver prices have fluctuated widely historically and are affected by numerous factors outside of the Company’s control, including, but not limited to, industrial and retail demand, central bank lending, forward sales by producers and speculators, levels of worldwide production, short-term changes in supply and demand because of speculative hedging activities, and certain other factors related specifically to gold.

Capital Management

The Company’s policy is to maintain a strong capital base to maintain investor and creditor confidence and to sustain future development of the business. The capital structure of the Company currently consists of equity, comprising share capital and reserves, net of accumulated deficit.

There were no changes in the Company’s approach to capital management during the period. The Company is not subject to any externally imposed capital requirements.

1.15 Other MD&A Requirements

Additional information relating to the Company, including the Company’s 2017 Annual Information Form, is available under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

Page | 30

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.15.1 Disclosure of Outstanding Share Data

The capital structure of the Company as of March 28, 2018, is shown in the following table:

	Number
Common shares issued and outstanding	311,816,308
Share options pursuant to the Company’s incentive plan	19,814,431
Deferred share units	458,129
Restricted share units	506,495
Warrants and non-incentive plan options1	31,766,107

Note to table:

1. Non-incentive plan options make up 327,700 of the total.  These were issued on the acquisition of Cannon Point in October 2015.  Warrants make up the balance and were issued pursuant to the acquisition of Mission Gold in December 2015 and the prospectus and private placement financings in June 2016 and July 2016 respectively.  

1.15.2 Disclosure Controls and Procedures

The Company’s management, with the participation of its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), have evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on that evaluation, the Company’s CEO and CFO have concluded that, as of the end of the period covered by this report, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by the Company in reports it files is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the appropriate time periods and is accumulated and communicated to management, including the CEO and CFO, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

1.15.3 Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

The Company’s management, including the CEO and the CFO, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting (“ICFR”) is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by the Company’s Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with IFRS. The Company’s ICFR includes those policies and procedures that:

● pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;

● provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with IFRS, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and

● provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements.

The Company’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s ICFR as of December 31, 2017. In making the assessment, it used the criteria set forth in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Based on their assessment, management has concluded that, as of December 31, 2017, the Company’s ICFR was effective based on those criteria.

Page | 31

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.15.4 Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There has been no change in the Company’s ICFR that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s ICFR.

1.15.5 Limitations of Controls and Procedures

The Company’s management, including its CEO and CFO, believe that any system of disclosure controls and procedures or ICFR, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Furthermore, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, they cannot provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been prevented or detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by unauthorized override of controls. The design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in a cost effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.

Page | 32

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

1.15.6 Risk Factors

The securities of Northern Dynasty are highly speculative and subject to a number of risks. A prospective investor or other person reviewing Northern Dynasty for a prospective investor should not consider an investment in Northern Dynasty unless the investor is capable of sustaining an economic loss of their entire investment. The risks associated with Northern Dynasty’s business include:

Inability to Ultimately Achieve Mine Permitting and Build a Mine at the Pebble Project.

The Company may ultimately be unable to secure the necessary permits under United States Federal and Alaskan State laws to build and operate a mine at the Pebble Project. There is no assurance that the EPA will not seek to undertake future regulatory action to impede or restrict the Pebble Project. In addition, there are prominent and well organized opponents of the Pebble Project and the Company may be unable, even if we present solid scientific and technical evidence of risk mitigation, to overcome such opposition and convince governmental authorities that a mine should be permitted at the Pebble Project. The Company faces not only the permitting and regulatory issues typical of companies seeking to build a mine, but additional public and regulatory scrutiny due to its location and likely size. Accordingly, there is no assurance that the Company will obtain the required permits. The Company has filed a CWA 404 permit application with the US Army Corps of Engineers, which triggered an EIS process under NEPA. The EIS process under NEPA, and the requirement for the Company to secure a broad range of other permits and authorizations from multiple federal and state regulatory agencies will take several years. After all permits necessary to begin construction are in hand, a number of years would be required to finance and build a mine and commence operations. During these periods, the Company would likely have no income and so would require additional financing to continue its operations. Unless and until we build a mine at the Pebble Project, we will be unable to achieve revenues from operations and may not be able to sell or otherwise recover our investment in the Pebble Project, which would have a material adverse effect on the Company and an investment in the Company’s common shares.

Risk of Secure Title or Property Interest

There can be no certainty that title to any property interest acquired by the Company or any of its subsidiaries is without defects. Although the Company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure that legal title to its properties is properly documented, there can be no assurance that its property interests may not be challenged or impugned. Such property interests may be subject to prior unregistered agreements or transfers or other land claims, and title may be affected by undetected defects and adverse laws and regulations.

The Pebble Partnership’s mineral concessions at Pebble are located on State of Alaska lands specifically designated for mineral exploration and development. Alaska is a stable jurisdiction with a well-developed regulatory and legal framework for resource development and public lands management, a strong commitment to the rule of law and lengthy track record for encouraging investment in the development if its land and natural resources.  

The Pebble Project is Subject to Political and Environmental Regulatory Opposition

As is typical for a large scale mining project, the Pebble Project faces organized opposition from certain individuals and organizations who are motivated to preclude any possible mining in the Bristol Bay Watershed (the “BBW”). The BBW is an important wildlife and salmon habitat area. Accordingly, one of the greatest risks to the Pebble Project is seen to be political/permitting risk which may ultimately preclude construction of a mine at the Pebble Project. Opposition may include legal challenges to exploration and development permits, which may delay or halt development. Other tactics may also be employed by opposition groups to delay or frustrate development at Pebble, included political and public advocacy, electoral strategies, media and public outreach campaigns and protest activity.

Page | 33

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

The Pebble Partnership’s Mineral Property Interests Do Not Contain Any Ore Reserves or Any Known Body of Economic Mineralization

Although there are known bodies of mineralization on the Pebble Project, and the Pebble Partnership has completed core drilling programs within, and adjacent to, the deposits to determine measured and indicated resources, there are currently no known reserves or body of commercially viable ore and the Pebble Project must be considered an exploration and feasibility evaluation project only. Extensive additional work is required before Northern Dynasty or the Pebble Partnership can ascertain if any mineralization may be economic and hence constitute “ore”.

Mineral Resources Disclosed by Northern Dynasty or the Pebble Partnership for the Pebble Project are Estimates Only

Northern Dynasty has included mineral resource estimates that have been made in accordance with NI 43-101. These resource estimates are classified as “measured resources”, “indicated resources” and “inferred resources”. Northern Dynasty advises investors that while these terms are mandated by Canadian securities administrators, the SEC does not recognize these terms. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of mineral deposits classified as “measured resources” or “indicated resources” will ever be converted into ore reserves. Further, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or prefeasibility studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

All amounts of mineral resources are estimates only, and Northern Dynasty cannot be certain that any specified level of recovery of metals from the mineralized material will in fact be realized or that the Pebble Project or any other identified mineral deposit will ever qualify as a commercially mineable (or viable) ore body that can be economically exploited. Mineralized material which is not mineral reserves does not have demonstrated economic viability. In addition, the quantity of mineral reserves and mineral resources may vary depending on, among other things, metal prices and actual results of mining. There can be no assurance that any future economic or technical assessments undertaken by the Company with respect to the Pebble Project will demonstrate positive economics or feasibility.

Negative Operating Cash Flow

The Company currently has a negative operating cash flow and will continue to have that for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, the Company will require substantial additional capital in order to fund its future exploration and development activities. The Company does not have any arrangements in place for this funding and there is no assurance that such funding will be achieved when required. Any failure to obtain additional financing or failure to achieve profitability and positive operating cash flows will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

Page | 34

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Northern Dynasty Has No History of Earnings and No Foreseeable Earnings, and May Never Achieve Profitability or Pay Dividends

Northern Dynasty has only had losses since inception and there can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will ever be profitable. Northern Dynasty has paid no dividends on its shares since incorporation. Northern Dynasty presently has no ability to generate earnings as its mineral properties are in the pre-development stage.

Northern Dynasty’s Consolidated Financial Statements have been Prepared Assuming Northern Dynasty will Continue on a Going Concern Basis

Northern Dynasty’s Interim Financial Statements have been prepared on the basis that Northern Dynasty will continue as a going concern. At December 31, 2017, Northern Dynasty had working capital of $56,832. With the receipt of the early option payment from First Quantum, Northern Dynasty is required to utilize these funds solely for permitting related expenditures at the Pebble Project. Northern Dynasty has prioritized the allocation of the remaining available financial resources to meet key corporate and Pebble Project expenditure requirements in the near term. Additional financing will be required for continued corporate expenditures and material expenditures at the Pebble Project. Northern Dynasty’s continuing operations and the underlying value and recoverability of the amounts shown for mineral property interest are entirely dependent upon the existence of economically recoverable mineral reserves at the Pebble Project, the ability of the Company to finance its operating costs, the completion of the exploration and development of the Pebble Project, the Pebble Partnership obtaining the necessary permits to mine, and on future profitable production at the Pebble Project. Furthermore, failure to continue as a going concern would require that Northern Dynasty’s assets and liabilities be restated on a liquidation basis, which would likely differ significantly from their going concern assumption carrying values. Refer also to discussion in 1.6 Liquidity.

As the Pebble Project is Northern Dynasty’s only Mineral Property Interest, the Failure to Establish that the Pebble Project Possesses Commercially Viable and Legally Mineable Deposits of Ore may cause a Significant Decline in the Trading Price of Northern Dynasty’s Common Shares and Reduce its ability to obtain New Financing

The Pebble Project is, through the Pebble Partnership, Northern Dynasty’s only mineral project. Northern Dynasty’s principal business objective is to carry out further exploration and related activities to establish whether the Pebble Project possesses commercially viable deposits of ore. If Northern Dynasty is not successful in its plan of operations, Northern Dynasty may have to seek a new mineral property to explore or acquire an interest in a new mineral property or project. Northern Dynasty anticipates that such an outcome would adversely impact the price of Northern Dynasty’s common shares. Furthermore, Northern Dynasty anticipates that its ability to raise additional financing to fund exploration of a new property or the acquisition of a new property or project would be impaired as a result of the failure to establish commercial viability of the Pebble Project.

If prices for copper, gold, molybdenum and silver decline, Northern Dynasty may not be able to raise the additional financing required to fund expenditures for the Pebble Project

The ability of Northern Dynasty to raise financing to fund the Pebble Project, will be significantly affected by changes in the market price of the metals for which it explores. The prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver are volatile, and are affected by numerous factors beyond Northern Dynasty’s control. The level of interest rates, the rate of inflation, the world supplies of and demands for copper, gold, molybdenum and silver and the stability of exchange rates can all cause fluctuations in these prices. Such external economic factors are influenced by changes in international investment patterns and monetary systems and political developments. The prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver have fluctuated in recent years, and future significant price declines could cause investors to be unprepared to finance exploration of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver, with the result that Northern Dynasty may not have sufficient financing with which to fund its exploration activities.

Page | 35

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Mining is Inherently Dangerous and Subject to Conditions or Events Beyond the Company’s Control, which Could have a Material Adverse Effect on the Company’s Business

Hazards such as fire, explosion, floods, structural collapses, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected geological conditions, ground control problems, power outages, inclement weather, seismic activity, cave-ins and mechanical equipment failure are inherent risks in the Company’s exploration, development and mining operations. These and other hazards may cause injuries or death to employees, contractors or other persons at the Company’s mineral properties, severe damage to and destruction of the Company’s property, plant and equipment and mineral properties, and contamination of, or damage to, the environment, and may result in the suspension of the Company’s exploration and development activities and any future production activities. Safety measures implemented by the Company may not be successful in preventing or mitigating future accidents.

Northern Dynasty Competes with Larger, Better Capitalized Competitors in the Mining Industry

The mining industry is competitive in all of its phases, including financing, technical resources, personnel and property acquisition. It requires significant capital, technical resources, personnel and operational experience to effectively compete in the mining industry. Because of the high costs associated with exploration, the expertise required to analyze a project’s potential and the capital required to develop a mine, larger companies with significant resources may have a competitive advantage over Northern Dynasty. Northern Dynasty faces strong competition from other mining companies, some with greater financial resources, operational experience and technical capabilities than Northern Dynasty possesses. As a result of this competition, Northern Dynasty may be unable to maintain or acquire financing, personnel, technical resources or attractive mining properties on terms Northern Dynasty considers acceptable or at all.

Compliance with Environmental Requirements will take Considerable Resources and Changes to these Requirements could Significantly Increase the Costs of Developing the Pebble Project and Could Delay These Activities

Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership must comply with stringent environmental legislation in carrying out work on the Pebble Project. Environmental legislation is evolving in a manner that will require stricter standards and enforcement, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance, more stringent environmental assessments of proposed projects and a heightened degree of responsibility for companies and their officers, directors and employees. Changes in environmental legislation could increase the cost to the Pebble Partnership of carrying out its exploration and, if warranted, development of the Pebble Project. Further, compliance with new or additional environmental legislation may result in delays to the exploration and, if warranted, development activities.

Changes in Government Regulations or the Application thereof and the Presence of Unknown Environmental Hazards on Northern Dynasty’s Mineral Properties May Result in Significant Unanticipated Compliance and Reclamation Costs

Government regulations relating to mineral rights tenure, permission to disturb areas and the right to operate can adversely affect Northern Dynasty. Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership may not be able to obtain all necessary licenses and permits that may be required to carry out exploration at our projects. Obtaining the necessary governmental permits is a complex, time-consuming and costly process. The duration and success of efforts to obtain permits are contingent upon many variables not within our control. Obtaining environmental permits may increase costs and cause delays depending on the nature of the activity to be permitted and the interpretation of applicable requirements implemented by the permitting authority. There can be no assurance that all necessary approvals and permits will be obtained and, if obtained, that the costs involved will not exceed those that we previously estimated. It is possible that the costs and delays associated with the compliance with such standards and regulations could become such that we would not proceed with the development or operation of a mine at the Pebble Project.

Page | 36

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Litigation

The Company was until recently, and may in future be subject to legal proceedings, including with regard to actions discussed in Other Matters in 1.2.1.3 Legal Matters in the pursuit of its Pebble Project. Given the uncertain nature of these actions, the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome thereof. If the Company is unable to resolve these matters favorably, it will likely have a material adverse effect of the Company.

Northern Dynasty is Subject to Many Risks that are Not Insurable and, as a Result, Northern Dynasty will Not Be Able to Recover Losses through Insurance Should Such Certain Events Occur

Hazards such as unusual or unexpected geological formations and other conditions are involved in mineral exploration and development. Northern Dynasty may become subject to liability for pollution, cave-ins or hazards against which it cannot insure. The payment of such liabilities could result in increase in Northern Dynasty’s operating expenses which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on Northern Dynasty’s financial position and its results of operations. Although Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership maintain liability insurance in an amount which we consider adequate, the nature of these risks is such that the liabilities might exceed policy limits, the liabilities and hazards might not be insurable against, or Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership might elect not to insure itself against such liabilities due to high premium costs or other reasons, in which event Northern Dynasty could incur significant liabilities and costs that could materially increase Northern Dynasty’s operating expenses.

If Northern Dynasty Loses the Services of the Key Personnel that it Engages to Undertake its Activities, then Northern Dynasty’s Plan of Operations May Be Delayed or be More Expensive to Undertake than Anticipated

Northern Dynasty’s success depends to a significant extent on the performance and continued service of certain independent contractors, including HDSI (refer 1.9 Transactions with Related Parties). The Company has access to the full resources of HDSI, an experienced exploration and development firm with in-house geologists, engineers and environmental specialists, to assist in its technical review of the Pebble Project. There can be no assurance that the services of all necessary key personnel will be available when required or if obtained, that the costs involved will not exceed those that we previously estimated. It is possible that the costs and delays associated with the loss of services of key personnel could become such that we would not proceed with the development or operation of a mine at the Pebble Project.

The Market Price of Northern Dynasty’s Common Shares is Subject to High Volatility and Could Cause Investor Loss.

The market price of a publicly traded stock, especially a resource issuer like Northern Dynasty, is affected by many variables in addition to those directly related to exploration successes or failures. Such factors include the general condition of markets for resource stocks, the strength of the economy generally, the availability and attractiveness of alternative investments, and the breadth of the public markets for the stock. The effect of these and other factors on the market price of the Company’s common shares suggests Northern Dynasty’s shares will continue to be volatile. Therefore, investors could suffer significant losses if Northern Dynasty’s shares are depressed or illiquid when an investor needs to sell Northern Dynasty shares.

Page | 37

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.
Management's Discussion And Analysis
Year ended December 31, 2017

Northern Dynasty Will Require Additional Funding to Meet the Development Objectives of the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty will need to raise additional financing (through share issuances, debt or asset level partnering) to achieve permitting and development of the Pebble Project. In addition, a positive production decision at the Pebble Project would require significant capital for project engineering and construction. Accordingly, the continuing development of the Pebble Project will depend upon Northern Dynasty’s ability to obtain financing through debt financing, equity financing, the joint venturing of the project, or other means. There can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will be successful in obtaining the required financing, or that it will be able to raise the funds on terms that do not result in high levels of dilution to shareholders.

Inability to Complete the First Quantum Transaction

The successful completion of a partnering transaction is subject to risks related to the satisfactory completion of due diligence and negotiations, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all necessary approvals. The transaction may not be successfully completed or completed on terms satisfactory to the Company. Accordingly, the continuation of current and proposed permitting activities and the development of the Pebble Project may depend upon Northern Dynasty’s ability to complete the transaction. There can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will be successful in that regard, failing which the continuation of these activities will require that the Company secure additional financing from alternative sources (see above).

Page | 38

EX-99.7

 

ANNUAL INFORMATION FORM

FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2017

This annual information form (“AIF”) is as of March 28, 2018

 

Item 1. Table of Contents

	Page
Item 1.   Table Of Contents	2
Item 2.   Preliminary Notes	3
Item 3.   Corporate Structure	10
Item 4.   General Development Of The Business	10
Item 5.   Description Of Business	13
Item 6.   Dividends	36
Item 7.   Description Of Capital Structure	36
Item 8.   Market For Securities	36
Item 9.   Escrowed Securities	38
Item 10   Directors And Officers	38
Item 11.   Promoters	46
Item 12.   Legal Proceedings	46
Item 13.   Interest Of Management And Others In Material Transactions	52
Item 14.   Transfer Agent And Registrar	52
Item 15.   Material Contracts	52
Item 16.   Interests Of Experts	52
Item 17.   Additional Information	52
Item 18.   Disclosure For Companies Not Sending Information Circulars	53
Item 19.    Audit And Risk Committee, Auditor Fees, Exemptions, Code Of Ethics	53
Appendix A - Audit And Risk Committee Charter	56

 

Item 2. Preliminary Notes

This AIF contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Wherever possible, words such as “plans”, “expects”, or “does not expect”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “anticipate” or “does not anticipate”, “believe”, “intend” and similar expressions or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved, have been used to identify forward-looking information.

Forward-looking information in this AIF include, without limitation, statements regarding:

• our expectations regarding the potential for securing the necessary permitting of a mine at the Pebble Project and our ability to establish that such a permitted mine can be economically developed;

• the outcome of due diligence and negotiations to complete a partnering transaction;

the outcome of any legal proceedings in which we are engaged;

• our plan of operations, including our plans to carry out and finance exploration and development activities,;

• our ability to raise capital for the exploration and development activities;

• our expected financial performance in future periods;

• our expectations regarding the exploration and development potential of the Pebble Project; and

• factors relating to our investment decisions.

Forward-looking information is based on the reasonable assumptions, estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date that such statements are made, but which may prove to be incorrect. We believe that the assumptions and expectations reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable.

Key assumptions upon which the Company’s forward-looking information are based include:

• that we will be able to secure sufficient capital necessary for continued environmental assessment and permitting activities and engineering work which must be completed prior to any potential development of the Pebble Project which would then require engineering and financing in order to advance to ultimate construction;

• that we will successfully complete a partnering transaction, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all necessary approvals.

• that we will ultimately be able to demonstrate that a mine at the Pebble Project can be economically developed and operated in an environmentally sound and socially responsible manner, meeting all relevant federal, state and local regulatory requirements so that we will be ultimately able to obtain permits authorizing construction of a mine at the Pebble Project;

• that the market prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver will not decline significantly or stay depressed for a lengthy period of time;

• that key personnel will continue their employment with us; and

• that we will continue to be able to secure minimum adequate financing on acceptable terms.

Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list is not exhaustive of all factors and assumptions, which may have been used. Forward looking statements are also subject to risks and uncertainties facing our business, any of which could have a material impact on our outlook.

Some of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include:

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 3

 

• an inability to ultimately obtain permitting for a mine at the Pebble Project;

• an inability to establish that the Pebble Project may be economically developed and mined or contain commercially viable deposits of ore based on a mine plan for which government authorities are prepared to grant permits;

• an inability to complete a partnering transaction on terms satisfactory to the Company;

• an inability to continue to fund exploration and development activities and other operating costs;

• the highly cyclical and speculative nature of the mineral resource exploration business;

• the pre-development stage economic viability and technical uncertainties of the Pebble Project and the lack of known reserves on the Pebble Project;

• an inability to recover even the financial statement carrying values of the Pebble Project if we cease to continue on a going concern basis;

• the potential for loss of the services of key executive officers;

• a history of, and expectation of further, financial losses from operations impacting our ability to continue on a going concern basis;

• inability to establish that the Pebble Project contains commercially viable deposits of ore;

• the volatility of gold, copper, molybdenum and silver prices;

• the inherent risk involved in the exploration, development and production of minerals, and the presence of unknown geological and other physical and environmental hazards at the Pebble Project;

• the potential for changes in, or the introduction of new, government regulations relating to mining, including laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and project legal titles;

• potential claims by third parties to titles or rights involving the Pebble Project;

• the unpredictability of the outcome of litigation;

• the possible inability to insure our operations against all risks;

• the highly competitive nature of the mining business;

• the potential dilution to current shareholders due to any future equity financings;

• the potential dilution to current shareholders from the exercise of share purchase options to purchase the Company’s shares; and

• that we have never paid dividends and will not do so in the foreseeable future.

This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect any of the Company’s forward-looking statements or information. Forward-looking statements or information are statements about the future and are inherently uncertain, and actual achievements of the Company or other future events or conditions may differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements or information due to a variety of risks, uncertainties and other factors, including, without limitation, the risks and uncertainties described above. See “Risk Factors” on page 31.

Our forward-looking statements are based on the reasonable beliefs, expectations and opinions of management on the date of this AIF. Although we have attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There is no assurance that such information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such information. Accordingly, readers should appreciate the inherent uncertainty of, and not place undue reliance on, forward-looking information. We do not undertake to update any forward-looking information, except as, and to the extent required by, applicable securities laws.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 4

 

Incorporation of Continuous Disclosure Documents by Reference

In this AIF, the “Company” or “Northern Dynasty” refers to Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. and all its subsidiaries and affiliated partnerships together unless the context states otherwise.

The AIF incorporates by reference a technical report prepared pursuant to National Instrument 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”) effective date December 2017, copies of which are available on request from the offices of Northern Dynasty or by downloading from the SEDAR website under the Company’s profile at www.sedar.com.

Currency and Metric Equivalents

All dollar amounts are expressed in Canadian dollars unless otherwise indicated. The Company’s accounts are maintained in Canadian dollars. The daily rate of exchange on December 31, 2017 (based on the last business day which was December 29, 2017), as reported by the Bank of Canada for the conversion of one Canadian dollar into one United States dollar (“U.S. dollar”), was $1.2545.

Currency and Exchange Rates

On March 28, 2018, the rate of exchange of the Canadian Dollar, based on the daily rate in Canada as published by the Bank of Canada, was US$1.00 = $1.2908. Exchange rates published by the Bank of Canada, available on its website www.bankofcanada.ca, are nominal quotations - not buying or selling rates - and intended for statistical or analytical purposes.

The following tables set out the exchange rates, based on the daily rates in Canada as published by the Bank of Canada for the conversion of Canadian Dollars into U.S. dollars.

	Year Ended December 31  (Canadian Dollars per U.S. Dollar)
	2017	2016 1	2015 1	2014 1
Rate at end of year	$1.2545	$1.3427	$1.3840	$1.1601
Average rate for year	$1.2986	$1.3248	$1.2787	$1.1046
High for year	$1.3743	$1.4589	$1.3990	$1.1656
Low for year	$1.2128	$1.2544	$1.1728	$1.0639

1. Based on the daily noon rate. This rate is no longer published.

Monthly High and Low Exchange Rate (Canadian Dollar per U.S. Dollar)
Month or Period	High	Low
March 2017 (to March 28, 2017)	$1.3088	$1.2830
February 2018	$1.2809	$1.2288
January 2018	$1.2535	1.2293
December 2017	$1.2886	$1.2545
November 2017	$1.2888	$1.2683

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 5

 

For ease of reference, the following factors for converting metric measurements into Imperial equivalents are as follows:

Metric Units	Multiply by	Imperial Units
hectares	2.471	= acres
metres	3.281	= feet
kilometres	0.621	= miles (5,280 feet)
grams	0.032	= ounces (troy)
tonnes	1.102	= tons (short) (2,000 pounds)
grams/tonne	0.029	= ounces (troy)/ton

Glossary

In this AIF the following terms have the meanings set forth herein:

Alkalic	Igneous rock containing a relatively high percentage of sodium and potassium feldspar; alteration can also introduce alkali minerals.
Argillic	Hydrothermal alteration of wall rock which forms clay minerals including kaolinite, smectite, illite and other species.
CuEQ	Copper Equivalent
Comminution	Reduction of solid materials from one average particle size to a smaller average particle size by crushing, grinding, cutting, vibrating, or other means.
Deportment	Assessment of how minerals contribute to grade, as each mineral is likely to behave differently to comminution, flotation or leaching.
Diorite	Grey to dark-grey igneous intrusive rock of intermediate composition, composed principally of plagioclase feldspar along with biotite, hornblende and/or pyroxene.
Element Abbreviations	Au - Gold; Ag - Silver; Al - Aluminum; Cu - Copper; Fe - Iron; Mo - Molybdenum; Na - Sodium; O - Oxygen; Pb - Lead; S - Sulphur; Zn - Zinc.
Geometallurgy	Practice of combining geology and/or geostatistics with metallurgy.
Graben	Down-dropped block of land bordered by faults.
Granodiorite	Medium- to coarse-grained acid igneous rock with quartz (>20%), plagioclase and alkali feldspar, commonly with minor hornblende and/or biotite.
Hypogene	Processes below the earth’s surface which, in mineral deposits, result in precipitation of primary minerals like sulphides.
Hydrothermal mineral deposit	Any concentration of metallic minerals formed by the precipitation of solids from hot waters (hydrothermal solution). The solutions may be sourced from a magma or from deeply circulating water heated by magma.
Illite Pyrite	Alteration zone with significant amounts of illite – a clay mineral and pyrite – an iron sulphide mineral.
Intrusion (batholith, dyke, pluton)	Medium to coarse grained igneous bodies which crystallized at depth within the Earth’s crust. Large intrusive bodies are called batholiths; smaller bodies are plutons and linear bodies are dykes.
Leached Cap	Rock which originally contained mineralization that was subsequently removed due to weathering processes.
Locked Cycle Test	A repetitive batch flotation test used in mineral processing laboratories while developing a metallurgical flowsheet.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 6

 

Monzonite	Igneous intrusive rock with approximately equal amounts of plagioclase and alkali feldspar, and less than 5% quartz by volume.
National Instrument 43-101 (“NI 43-101”)	The Canadian securities instrument which establishes disclosure standards for mineral projects of Canadian publicly-traded resource companies.
K Silicate	Alteration zone with significant potassium (K) bearing silicate minerals.
Kriging	A method of estimation of a variable value (such as metal grade) at an unmeasured location from measured values, weighted by distance and orientation, at nearby locations.
Porphyry deposit	A type of mineral deposit genetically related to igneous intrusions in which ore minerals are widely distributed, generally of low grade but commonly of large tonnage.
Potassic	Hydrothermal alteration which results in the production of potassium-bearing minerals such as biotite, muscovite or sericite, and/or orthoclase.
Pyrophyllite	Aluminosilicate hydroxide mineral that forms as a result of hydrothermal alteration or low grade metamorphism.
QSP	Quartz Sericite Pyrite; an alteration zone.
Sericite	Alteration zone with significant sericite, a fine-grained version of the mica mineral muscovite.
Sodic Potassic	Alteration zone with significant sodium (Na) and potassium (K) bearing minerals
Sodic	In this report, refers to a type of hydrothermal alteration that contains sodium-bearing minerals, most commonly albite feldspar.
Subduction	Process by which one tectonic plate moves under another tectonic plate.
Supergene	Refers to processes which occur relatively near the surface of the earth which modify or destroy original (hypogene) minerals by oxidation and chemical weathering.
Superterrane	A group of physically connected and related geological terranes (group of related rock units).

Resource Category (Classification) Definitions

The discussion of mineral deposit classifications in this AIF adheres to the mineral resource and mineral reserve definitions and classification criteria developed by the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (“CIM”) 2014. Estimated mineral resources fall into two broad categories dependent on whether the economic viability of them has been established and these are namely “resources” (potential for economic viability) and “reserves” (viable economic production is feasible). Resources are sub-divided into categories depending on the confidence level of the estimate based on level of detail of sampling and geological understanding of the deposit. The categories, from lowest confidence to highest confidence, are inferred resource, indicated resource and measured resource. The Company does not claim to have any reserves at this time. These resource classifications can be more particularly described as follows:

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 7

 

Mineral Resource	A concentration or occurrence of solid material of economic interest in or on the Earth’s crust in such form, grade or quality and quantity that there are reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction.  The location, quantity, grade or quality, continuity and other geological characteristics of a Mineral Resource are known, estimated or interpreted from specific geological evidence and knowledge, including sampling.
Inferred Mineral Resource	That part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and sampling.  Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify geological and grade or quality continuity.  It has a lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve.  It is reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued exploration.
Indicated Mineral Resource	That part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors in sufficient detail to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.  Geological evidence is derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to assume geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.  It has a lower level of confidence than that applying to a Measured Mineral Resource and may only be converted to a Probable Mineral Reserve.
Measured Mineral Resource	That part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape, and physical characteristics are estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the application of Modifying Factors to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit.  Geological evidence is derived from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing and is sufficient to confirm geological and grade or quality continuity between points of observation.  It has a higher level of confidence than that applying to either an Indicated Mineral Resource or an Inferred Mineral Resource.  It may be converted to a Proven Mineral Reserve or to a Probable Mineral Reserve.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 8

 

Cautionary Notes to United States Investors Concerning Mineral Resource Estimates

This AIF uses terms that comply with reporting standards in Canada and certain estimates are made in accordance with NI 43-101. NI 43-101 is a rule developed by the Canadian Securities Administrators that establishes standards for all public disclosure an issuer makes of scientific and technical information concerning mineral projects. Unless otherwise indicated, all resource estimates contained in or incorporated by reference in this prospectus have been prepared in accordance with NI 43-101. These standards differ significantly from the requirements of the United States Securities Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), and resource information contained herein and incorporated by reference herein may not be comparable to similar information disclosed by companies in the United States (“US companies”).

In addition, this AIF uses the terms “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources” and “inferred mineral resources” to comply with the reporting standards in Canada. We advise United States investors that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize them. United States investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of the mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into mineral reserves. These terms have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility.

Further, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and as to whether they can be mined legally or economically. Therefore, United States investors are also cautioned not to assume that all or any part of the inferred resources exist. In accordance with Canadian rules, estimates of “inferred mineral resources” cannot form the basis of feasibility or other economic studies, except in limited circumstances where permitted under NI 43-101.

It cannot be assumed that all or any part of “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources”, or “inferred mineral resources” will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part of the reported “measured mineral resources”, “indicated mineral resources”, or “inferred mineral resources” in this prospectus is economically or legally mineable.

In addition, disclosure of “contained ounces” is permitted disclosure under Canadian regulations; however, the SEC only permits issuers to report mineralization as in place tonnage and grade without reference to unit measures.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 9

 

Item 3. Corporate Structure

Northern Dynasty is a mineral exploration company incorporated on May 11, 1983 pursuant to the Company Act of the Province of British Columbia (predecessor statute to the British Columbia Corporations Act in force since 2004), under the name “Dynasty Resources Inc.” On November 30, 1983, the Company changed its name to “Northern Dynasty Explorations Ltd.” and subsequently, on October 11, 1997, changed its name to Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. Northern Dynasty became a reporting company in the Province of British Columbia on April 10, 1984 and was listed on the Vancouver Stock Exchange (now absorbed by the TSX Venture Exchange and herein generally “TSX-V”) from 1984-1987, listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) from 1987-1993, and delisted from trading but continued to comply with its continuous disclosure obligations from 1993 to 1994, and thereafter listed on TSX-V from 1994 to October 30, 2007 when it again began trading on the TSX. In November 2004, the common shares of Northern Dynasty were also listed on the American Stock Exchange (“AMEX”). AMEX was purchased by the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and the Company now trades on the NYSE American Exchange (“NYSE American”).

The head office of Northern Dynasty is located at 1040 West Georgia Street, 15th floor, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6E 4H1, telephone (604) 684-6365, facsimile (604) 684-8092. The Company’s legal registered office is in care of its Canadian attorneys, McMillan LLP, Barristers & Solicitors, at Suite 1500, 1055 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6E 4N7, telephone (604) 689-9111, facsimile (604) 685-7084.

The Company’s Alaska mineral resource exploration business is operated through a wholly-owned Alaskan registered limited partnership, the Pebble Limited Partnership (the “Pebble Partnership” or “PLP”), in which the Company owns a 100% interest in the Pebble Partnership through an Alaskan general partnership, the Northern Dynasty Partnership, which is a partnership formed by two of its subsidiaries. An indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, Pebble Mines Corp. is the general partner of the Pebble Partnership and responsible for its day-to-day operations. The business address of the Northern Dynasty Partnership is Suite 505, 3201 C Street, Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 99503.

In this AIF, a reference to the “Company” or “Northern Dynasty” includes a reference to PLP and the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries and other consolidated interests and entities, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Certain terms used herein are defined in the text and others are included in the glossary of this AIF.

Item 4. General Development of the Business

Company Development

Northern Dynasty is a mineral exploration company focused on the exploration and advancement towards feasibility, permitting and ultimately development of the Pebble Project, a copper-gold-molybdenum mineral project located in southwest Alaska (the “Pebble Project” or the “Project”). The Pebble Project is comprised of mineral claims that are held by subsidiaries of the Pebble Partnership, a 100% wholly-owned subsidiary of Northern Dynasty.

Northern Dynasty acquired a 100% interest the Pebble Project from an Alaskan subsidiary of Teck Resources Limited (“Teck”) in a series of transactions from October 2001 through to June 2006. Teck has retained certain royalties in the Pebble Project, as described in detail below under Item 5 – Description of Business.

The Pebble Partnership was converted into a limited partnership in July 2007 in connection with a joint venture for the Pebble Project entered into between the Company and an affiliate of Anglo American plc (“Anglo American”). From July 2007 to December 2013, approximately $595 million (US$573 million) was provided to the Pebble Partnership by the affiliate of Anglo American. A major portion of these funds were spent on exploration programs, resource estimates, environmental data collection and technical studies, with a significant portion spent on engineering of various possible mine development models and related infrastructure, power and transportation systems. These costs are not reflected in the Company’s asset accounts as they were funded by Anglo American or are required to be expensed. Whether any portion these past expenditures will prove to have significant value to the Company in future is currently unknown.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 10

 

Anglo American withdrew from the Pebble Partnership effective December 10, 2013, at which time Northern Dynasty re-acquired Anglo American’s 50% ownership interest in the Pebble Partnership. The Company has since that time held a 100% interest in the Pebble Partnership.

To December 31, 2017, approximately $837 million (US$775 million) in expenditures have been incurred on the Pebble Project. In addition, Northern Dynasty has spent approximately $106 million in acquisition costs on the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty does not have any operating revenue, although currently and historically it has had non-material annual interest revenue as a consequence of investing its surplus funds.

Three Year History

In February 2014, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) announced the initiation of a regulatory action under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) to consider restriction or a prohibition on mining activities associated with the Pebble deposit. From that time until May 2017, much of the Company’s efforts focused on providing information and responses to ward off this action, in particular, advancing a Multi-dimensional Strategy to position the Pebble Project to initiate federal and state permitting under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) unencumbered by any extraordinary development restrictions imposed by the federal agency. This strategy included three discrete pieces of litigation against the EPA, as described in more detail below in Item 12 – Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Actions:

• challenging the EPA’s statutory authority to pre-emptively impose development restrictions at the Pebble Project under Section 404(c) of the CWA prior to the Pebble Partnership submitting a proposed development plan for the project or the development of an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) under NEPA;

• alleging that the EPA violated Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) in the course of undertaking the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment and subsequent Section 404(c) of the CWA regulatory action; and

• alleging that the EPA is unlawfully withholding relevant documentation and other information sought by the Pebble Partnership under Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”).

Other activities by the Company during this period included maintaining an active corporate presence in Alaska to advance relationships with political and regulatory offices of government (both in Alaska and Washington, D.C.), Alaska Native partners and broader stakeholder relationships; maintaining the Pebble Project and Pebble claims in good standing; and seeking potential partner(s) to further advance the Pebble Project.

The Multi-dimensional Strategy was successful. On May 12, 2017, Northern Dynasty announced that the Pebble Partnership and the EPA (the “parties”) had reached a settlement agreement (the “joint settlement agreement”) with respect to the parties’ longstanding legal dispute over the pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA. Under the terms of the joint settlement agreement:

• the EPA agreed the Pebble Project can proceed into normal course permitting under the CWA and NEPA and that it cannot seek to utilize its authority under CWA 404(c) until such time as a final EIS has been completed by the US Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) so long as that occurs within a period of four years following the settlement agreement, and the Pebble Partnership files permit applications within 30 months of the date of the settlement agreement. EPA further agreed to initiate a process to consider withdrawing the Proposed Determination it issued under CWA 404(c) in July 2014. In January 2018, EPA announced that it had suspended the process to withdraw the preemptive regulatory action but will continue to support Pebble’s due process rights and right to proceed with permitting as agreed to in the 2017 joint settlement agreement; and

• the Pebble Partnership agreed to terminate each of the legal actions it brought against EPA since 2014, including the action under the FACA; an action challenging EPA’s statutory authority under the CWA; and an action under the FOIA.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 11

 

A copy of the joint settlement agreement is posted under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and EDGAR at www.sec.gov.

Once the joint settlement agreement was in place, Northern Dynasty refocused its efforts toward securing a project partner(s) with the financial resources to substantially contribute to permitting, building and operating a world-class mine at Pebble; and advancing a comprehensive program of engineering and environmental studies, field investigations and related technical studies for documentation to initiate federal and state permitting. Important progress has been made.

On December 18, 2017, Northern Dynasty announced that it has entered into a framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (“First Quantum”), which contemplates that an affiliate of First Quantum may subsequently execute an option agreement with Northern Dynasty. The option agreement contemplates an option payment of US$150 million staged over four years, which option will entitle First Quantum to acquire the right to earn a 50% interest in the Pebble Partnership for US$1.35 billion. The option period may be extended for up to 2 years by First Quantum making payments to be agreed upon which amounts will be offset against the US$1.35 billion additional investment amount. First Quantum’s entry into the option agreement is contingent upon the completion of due diligence, necessary regulatory approvals and the successful negotiation of the final form of the option agreement and associated commercial agreements. First Quantum has made a non-refundable early option payment of US$37.5 million to be applied solely for the purpose of progressing the permitting of the Pebble Project. Finalization and execution of the Option Agreement and associated commercial agreements is expected early in the second quarter of 2018¹.

On December 22, 2017, the Pebble Partnership filed for a US CWA 404 permit with the USACE, initiating federal permitting for the Pebble Project under the NEPA. On January 5, 2018, the Pebble Partnership received notice from USACE that the CWA 404 permitting documentation was accepted. Further, in February USACE advised the Pebble Partnership that it had selected AECOM, an experienced and global, integrated engineering, environmental, construction and infrastructure development firm as third-party contractor to support them in completing an EIS for the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty has completed the following financings within the past three years in order to fund its business operations:

• in late December 2014 and early January 2015, the Company completed a financing and raised gross proceeds of approximately $15.5 million through the issuance of 35,962,735 Special Warrants, each convertible into one common share without payment of additional consideration. All these Special Warrants were automatically converted or converted into common shares by September 2015. See Item 15 Material Contracts on page 51;

• in September 2015, the Company completed a financing and raised gross proceeds of approximately $15 million through the issuance of 37,600,000 Special Warrants, each convertible into one common share without payment of additional consideration. These Special Warrants were automatically converted into common shares in November 2015. See Item 15 Material Contracts on page 51;

• in October 2015, the Company issued 12,573,292 common shares to acquire Cannon Point Resources Ltd., a company with a primary asset of $4.25 million in cash;

• in December 2015, the Company issued 27,593,341 common shares to acquire Mission Gold Ltd. (“Mission Gold”), a company with primary assets of approximately $9 million in cash and a 100% interest in a titanium project that was sold by Mission Gold to a third party as part of the transaction with Northern Dynasty. The Company also completed a private placement of 12,881,344 common shares at a price of $0.412 per share for gross proceeds of approximately $5.2 million;

¹The likelihood of a partnering transaction is subject to risks related to the satisfactory completion of due diligence and negotiations, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all necessary approvals. Such process may not be successfully completed or completed on terms satisfactory to Northern Dynasty.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 12

 

• in June and July 2016, the Company completed a prospectus offering of 38,000,000 units and a private placement of 4,444,376 units respectively, in the capital of the Company. The units were priced $0.45 per unit and the Company raised gross proceeds of approximately $17.1 million and $2 million, respectively. Each Unit comprised of one common share and one common share purchase warrant (“Warrant”), each exercisable into one common share of the Company at an exercise price of $0.65 per share until June 10, 2021. The Warrants were listed and trade on the TSX under the symbol NDM.WT.B; and

• in January 2017, the Company completed a bought deal offering of 20,240,000 common shares which includes the exercise in full of the Underwriter’s over-allotment option, at price of US$1.85 per share for gross proceeds of approximately US$37.4 million.

Item 5. Description of Business

A.       The Pebble Project

The Company’s business is the exploration and advancement towards feasibility, permitting and ultimately development of the Pebble Project.

The Pebble Project Is Subject To State and Federal Laws

PLP and its subsidiaries are required to comply with all Alaska statutes in connection with the Pebble Project. These statutes govern titles, operations, environmental, development, operating and generally all aspects of exploration and development of a mine in Alaska.

Alaska Statute 38.05.185 among others establishes the rights to mining claims and mineral leases on lands owned by the State of Alaska and open to mineral entry. This group of statutes also covers annual labor and rental requirements, and royalties.

Operations on claims or leases on state owned land must be permitted under a plan of operations as set out in Title 11 of the Alaska Administrative Code, Chapter 86, Section 800. This regulation generally provides that the State Division of Mining can be the lead agency in coordinating the comments of all agencies, which must consent to the issuance of a plan of operations, and sets the requirements for the approval of a plan of operations.

Environmental conditions are controlled by Alaska Statute 46.08 (which prohibits release of oil and hazardous substances), Alaska Statute 46.03.060 (which sets water quality standards), and Alaska Statute 46.14 (which sets air quality standards).

Once a decision is made to enter permitting, the Pebble Project will be required to satisfy permitting requirements at three levels: federal, state and local (borough). The process takes approximately 3-4 years to complete and involves 11 regulatory agencies, 60+ categories of permits and significant ongoing opportunities for public involvement. The Alaska Department of Natural Resources Large Mine Permitting Team is responsible for coordinating permitting activities for large mine projects.

To satisfy permitting requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) and other regulatory statutes, a project must provide a comprehensive project design and operating plan for mine-site and infrastructure facilities; documentation of development alternatives investigated; mitigation and compensation strategies, and identification of residual effects; and environmental monitoring, reclamation and closure plans. The first step is to provide the required information (including a Project Description and Environmental Baseline Document) for an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) under NEPA, prepared by a third-party contractor under the direction of a lead federal agency, expected to be the US Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”). The EIS will determine whether sufficient evaluation of the project’s environmental effects and development alternatives has been undertaken. It will also provide the basis for federal, state and local government agencies to make individual permitting decisions.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 13

 

Under the US Clean Water Act (“CWA”), Section 404(c), the Administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is given the right to disallow the specification (including the withdrawal of specification) of any defined area as a disposal site if he or she determines that the release of such material will have an unacceptable adverse effect on municipal water supplies, local wildlife, spawning and breeding areas of fisheries, shellfish beds, and/or recreational areas. Such decisions made by the Administrator require notice and opportunity for public hearings, and consultation with the Secretary of the USACE. The Administrator shall set forth in writing and make public his or her findings and reasons for making any determination under this subsection.

B.       Technical Summary

The following disclosure is mainly summarized from the “2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA” by J. David Gaunt, P.Geo., James Lang, P.Geo., Eric Titley, P.Geo., and Ting Lu, P.Eng., and Stephen Hodgson, PEng., effective date December 22, 2017 (“2018 Technical Report”), and updated by Company staff. J. David Gaunt, P.Geo., James Lang, P.Geo., Eric Titley, P.Geo., Ting Lu, P.Eng., and Stephen Hodgson, PEng., are the qualified persons for the 2018 Technical Report and have reviewed and approved the content derived from that report.

Introduction

The Pebble deposit was originally discovered in 1989 and was acquired by Northern Dynasty in 2001. Since that time, Northern Dynasty and subsequently the Pebble Limited Partnership (the “Pebble Partnership”, in which Northern Dynasty currently owns a 100% interest) have conducted significant mineral exploration, environmental baseline data collection, and engineering work on the Pebble Project to advance it towards development.

Since the acquisition by Northern Dynasty, work at Pebble has led to an overall expansion of the Pebble deposit, as well as the discovery of several other mineralized occurrences along an extensive northeast-trending mineralized system underlying the property. Over 1 million feet of drilling has been completed on the property, a large proportion of which has been focused on the Pebble deposit. Several estimates of the mineral resources have been made over that time; the previous estimate of the mineral resources in the Pebble deposit was in 2014.

Comprehensive deposit delineation, environmental, socioeconomic and engineering studies of the Pebble deposit began in 2004 and continued through 2013.

In February 2014, the EPA announced a pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA to consider restriction or a prohibition of mining activities associated with the Pebble deposit. From 2014-2017, Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership focused on a multi-dimensional strategy, including legal and other initiatives to ward off this action. On May 12, 2017, Northern Dynasty announced a settlement agreement with EPA, clearing the way for Pebble to apply for a CWA 404 permit with the USACE. Section 404 of the CWA governs the discharge of dredged or fill materials into waters of the US, including wetlands. The USACE issues Section 404 permits with oversight by the EPA. Also, in light of stakeholder and regulatory feedback, Northern Dynasty had initiated a broad review of the Pebble Project that took place in 2016 and 2017 to consider, among other things, a smaller project footprint and improved environmental and safety enhancements, and has incorporated these and other improvements into a new proposed development project for Pebble. This proposal is outlined in a Project Description prepared by the Pebble Partnership and included as part of the Pebble Partnership’s CWA 404 permit application filed with the USACE on December 22, 2017. On January 8, 2018, USACE accepted the permitting documentation and confirmed that an EIS level of analysis is required to comply with its NEPA review of the Pebble Project. In light of the foregoing, Northern Dynasty commissioned a technical report to update information on the mineral resources and project status. The 2018 Technical Report incorporates a summary of the Project Description submitted with the CWA 404 permit application and an analysis of the revisions to the resource estimate based on process modifications reflected in the proposed project included in the Project Description.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 14

 

Northern Dynasty completed a Preliminary Assessment (now known as a Preliminary Economic Assessment or “PEA”) on the Pebble Project in February 2011 and, as noted above, since that time after considering stakeholder feedback, the Pebble Partnership submitted an application for a CWA 404 permit for the Pebble Project on the basis of a substantially smaller mine facility footprint and with other material revisions. These are summarized in the 2018 Technical Report and described briefly below. As a result, the economic analysis included in the 2011 PEA is considered by Northern Dynasty to be out of date such that it can no longer be relied upon. In light of the foregoing, the Pebble Project is no longer an advanced property for the purposes of NI 43-101, as the potential economic viability of the Pebble Project is not currently supported by a preliminary economic assessment, pre-feasibility study or feasibility study. The EIS process currently underway by the USACE will consider alternative scenarios with respect to a number of aspects of the proposed project. Accordingly, the Company has not completed a current comprehensive economic analysis of the Pebble Project. The Company anticipates that having a complete understanding of, and being able to properly assess all of the proposed alternatives the USACE will be considering as part of the scoping process conducted during the initial phase of the EIS will provide additional clarity with respect to the project to be evaluated, so that an economic analysis can be completed.

Property Description and Location

The Pebble Project is located in southwest Alaska, approximately 200 miles southwest of Anchorage, 17 miles northwest of the village of Iliamna, 160 miles northeast of Bristol Bay, and approximately 60 miles west of Cook Inlet. 

Figure 1      Property Location – Pebble Project

 

Source: 2018 Technical Report

Northern Dynasty holds, indirectly through a wholly-owned subsidiary and wholly-owned subsidiaries of the wholly-owned Pebble Partnership, Pebble East Claims Corporation and Pebble West Claims Corporation, a 100% interest in a contiguous block of 2,402 mineral claims covering approximately 417 square miles (which includes the Pebble Deposit) (Figure 2).

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 15

 

State mineral claims in Alaska are kept in good standing by performing annual assessment work or in lieu of assessment work by paying $100 per year per 40 acre (0.06 square mile) mineral claim, and by paying annual escalating state rentals. All of the assessment work payment obligations come due annually on August 31. Credit for excess work can be banked for a maximum of four years, and can be applied as necessary to continue to hold the claims in good standing. The Project claims have a variable amount of work credit available that can be applied in this way². State rentals for 2018 are approximately US$1,028,390 and are payable no later than 90 days after the assessment work is due.

The Pebble Partnership currently does not own surface rights associated with the mineral claims that comprise the Pebble Property. All lands are held by the State of Alaska, and surface rights may be acquired from the state government once areas required for mine development have been determined and permits awarded. Permits necessary for exploration drilling and other field programs associated with pre-development assessment of the Pebble Project are applied for each year. Environmental liabilities associated with the Pebble Project include removal of structures, closing monitoring wells, and removal of piezometers. The State of Alaska holds a $2 million bond associated with removal and reclamation of these liabilities.

Figure 2     Mineral Claims – Pebble Project

Source: 2018 Technical Report

Northern Dynasty acquired the Pebble Property by way of a two-part (Resource Lands and Exploration Lands) purchase option from an Alaskan subsidiary of Teck Cominco Limited (now Teck Resources Limited), which still retains a 4% pre-payback advance net profits royalty interest (after debt service) and 5% after-payback net profits interest royalty in any mine production from the Exploration Lands portion of the Pebble property shown on the figure below.

² Annual assessment work obligations for the property of some US$667,700 are due in 2018.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 16

 

Source: 2018 Technical Report

Accessibility, climate, local resources, infrastructure and physiography

Current access to the property is by helicopter from Iliamna. There is a modern airfield at Iliamna, with two paved 4,920 ft airstrips, that services the communities of Iliamna and Newhalen. The runways are suitable for DC-6 and Hercules cargo aircraft and commercial jet aircraft.

There are paved roads that connect the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen to the airport and to each other, and a partly paved, partly gravel road that extends to a proposed Newhalen River crossing near Nondalton. The property is currently not connected to any of these local communities by road; a road would be planned as part of the project design.

There is no access road connecting the communities nearest to the Pebble Project with the coast on Cook Inlet. From the coast, at Williamsport on Iniskin Bay, there is an 18.6-mile state-maintained road that terminates at the east end of Iliamna Lake, where watercraft and transport barges may be used to access Iliamna. The route from Williamsport, over land to Pile Bay on Iliamna Lake, is currently used to transport bulk fuel, equipment and supplies to communities around the lake during the summer months. Also during summer, supplies are barged up the Kvichak River, approximately 43.4 miles southwest of Iliamna, from Kvichak Bay on the North Pacific Ocean.

A small run-of-river hydroelectric installation on the nearby Tazamina River provides power for the three communities in the summer months. Supplemental power generation using diesel generators is required during winter months.

Iliamna and surrounding communities have a combined population of just over 400 people. As such, there is limited local commercial infrastructure except that which services seasonal sports fishing and hunting.

The property is situated at approximately 1,000 ft above mean sea level in an area described as subarctic tundra. It is characterized by gently rolling hills and an absence of permafrost. The climate is sufficiently moderate to allow a well-planned mineral exploration program to be conducted year-round at Pebble.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 17

 

Geological Setting and Mineralization

Pebble is a porphyry-style copper-gold-molybdenum-silver deposit that comprises two adjacent, contiguous, coeval hydrothermal centers called the Pebble East and Pebble West zones. Mineralization in the Pebble West zone extends from surface to depths of at least 3,000 ft whereas higher grade mineralization in the Pebble East zone extends to a depth of at least 5,810 ft but is concealed beneath an east-thickening wedge of unmineralized rock types. An important exploration target is represented by high-grade, but as yet undelineated, mineralization on the far eastern side of the deposit which was dropped 1,970 to 2,950 ft by normal faults into the northeast-trending East Graben.

The Pebble deposit formed about 90 million years ago in response to intrusion of granodiorite magmas generated by subduction of the Pacific Plate beneath the Wrangellia Superterrane. The Pebble deposit is hosted by these granodiorite intrusions and by the sedimentary and volcanic rocks of Jurassic to Cretaceous age, granodiorite and diorite sills and alkalic monzonite intrusions and associated breccias which host them.

Mineralization at Pebble is predominantly hypogene, although the Pebble West zone contains a thin zone of variably developed leached cap and underlying supergene mineralization. Disseminated and vein-hosted copper-gold-molybdenum-silver mineralization, dominated by chalcopyrite and locally accompanied by bornite, is associated with early potassic alteration in the shallow part of the Pebble East zone and with early sodic-potassic alteration in the Pebble West zone and deeper parts of the Pebble East zone. High-grade copper-gold mineralization is associated with younger pyrophyllite- and sericite-bearing subtypes of advanced argillic alteration in the Pebble East zone. The deposit is surrounded by weakly mineralized quartz-sericite-pyrite alteration; in the upper center of the deposit quartz-illite-pyrite alteration is an illite-altered relict of a mostly eroded quartz-sericite-pyrite cap to the deposit.

Exploration

Historical

Cominco Alaska, a division of Cominco Ltd. now Teck (“Cominco (Teck)”) began reconnaissance exploration in the Pebble region in the mid-1980s and in 1984 discovered the Sharp Mountain gold prospect near the southern margin of the current property. Gold was discovered in quartz veins of probable Tertiary age near the peak of Sharp Mountain. Grab samples of veins in talus ranged from 0.045 oz/ton Au to 9.32 oz/ton Au and 3.0 oz/ton Ag. In 1987, examination and sampling of several prominent limonitic and hematitic alteration zones yielded anomalous gold concentrations from the Sill prospect and the Pebble discovery outcrop.

Geophysical surveys were conducted on the property between 1988 and 1997. An induced polarization (“IP”) survey in 1989 at Pebble displayed response characteristics of a large porphyry-copper system. The surveys were dipole-dipole IP surveys, which defined a chargeability anomaly about 31.1 square miles in extent within Cretaceous age rocks that surround the eastern to southern margins of the Kaskanak batholith. All known zones of mineralization of Cretaceous age on the Pebble property occur within the broad IP anomaly.

In 1991, baseline environmental and engineering studies were initiated and weather stations were established. A preliminary evaluation was undertaken by Cominco (Teck) in 1991, and updated in 1992. Historical estimates of the mineral resources for the Pebble deposit were completed by Cominco (Teck), most recently in 2000.

Northern Dynasty and Pebble Partnership

Between 2001 and 2006, the entire Pebble property was mapped for rock type, structure and alteration at a scale of 1:10,000, providing an important geological framework for interpretation of other exploration data. A geological map of the Pebble deposit was also constructed but, due to a paucity of outcrop, was based solely on drill hole information. The content and interpretation of district and deposit scale geological maps have not changed materially from those presented in 2009 and 2010.

A number of geophysical surveys, including IP, magnetic and other survey types were completed by Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership between 2001 and 2010 to test the Pebble deposit and other occurrences on the Pebble property. Between 2001 and 2003, Northern Dynasty collected 1,026 soil samples, outlining high-contrast, coincident anomalies in gold, copper, molybdenum and other metals in an area that measures at least 5.6 miles north-south by up to 2.5 miles east-west, with strong but smaller anomalies in several outlying zones. All soil geochemical anomalies lie within the 31.1 square mile IP chargeability anomaly. Limited surficial geochemical surveys were completed in 2010 and 2011.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 18

 

Drilling

Extensive drilling totalling 1,042,218 ft has been completed in 1,355 holes on the Pebble Project. These drill programs took place during 19 of the 26 years from 1988 to 2013.

Northern Dynasty with its partners completed drilling for exploration, deposit delineation, engineering and environmental purposes between 2002 and 2013. Highlights from exploration and deposit delineation drilling since 2002 include:

• in 2002, drill testing of IP chargeability and multi-element geochemical anomalies outside of the Pebble deposit but within the larger and broader IP chargeability anomaly discovered the 38 Zone porphyry copper-gold-molybdenum deposit, the 52 Zone porphyry copper occurrence, the 37 Zone gold-copper skarn deposit, the 25 Zone gold deposit, and several small occurrences in which gold values exceeded 3.0 g/t.

• in 2003, drilling took place within and adjacent to the Pebble West zone and outside the Pebble deposit to test for extensions and new mineralization at four other zones, including the 38 Zone porphyry copper-gold-molybdenum deposit and the 37 Zone gold-copper skarn deposit.

• in 2004, 147 exploration holes were drilled in the Pebble deposit; the Pebble East zone is identified; the 308 Zone porphyry copper-gold-molybdenum deposit is discovered.

• in 2005 and 2006, drilling at Pebble East confirms its large size and higher grades of copper, gold and molybdenum.

• in 2007, 34 holes extend Pebble East to the northeast, northwest, south and southeast.

• in 2008, 31 delineation and infill holes were drilled at Pebble East. FMMUSA drilled seven exploration holes on land that is now controlled by the Pebble Partnership.

• in 2009 and 2010, delineation holes were drilled at the margins of Pebble West and exploration holes were drilled elsewhere on the property.

• in 2011 and 2012, holes drilled at the Pebble West zone indicate potential for resource expansion laterally and to depth; exploration targets were tested on the Kaskanak claims to the northwest and south of Pebble, and on the KAS claims further south.

Drilling for engineering (metallurgical and geotechnical) and environmental (hydrological) purposes began in 2004 and continued through 2013. No drilling took place in 2014, 2015, 2016 or 2017.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 19

 

The spatial distribution and type of holes drilled are illustrated below.

Figure 3     Location of Drill Holes – Pebble Project

Source: 2018 Technical Report

Most of the footage on the Pebble Project was drilled using diamond core drills and the Pebble resource estimate was calculated exclusively from these holes. Many of the cored holes were advanced through overburden using a tricone bit with no core recovery. These overburden lengths are included in the core drilling total.

Since early 2004, all Pebble drill core has been geotechnically logged. Over 69,000 measurements were made for a variety of geotechnical parameters on 735,000 ft of core drilling. Recovery is generally very good and averages 98.5% overall; two-thirds of all measured intervals have 100% core recovery. Additionally, all Pebble drill core from the 2001 through 2013 drill programs was photographed in a digital format.

All drill hole collars have been surveyed using a differential global positioning system. A digital terrain model for the site was generated by photogrammetric methods in 2004. All post-Cominco (Teck) drill holes have been surveyed downhole, typically using a downhole survey (single shot magnetic gravimetric) tool. A total of 989 holes were drilled vertically (-90°) and 192 were inclined from -42° to -85° at various azimuths.

A summary of drilling by various categories (operator, type, year and area) to the end of the 2013 exploration program are compiled in the table below. As shown in Figure 3 and Table 1 (East, West, Main), a large proportion of the drilling has been directed toward the Pebble deposit.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 20

 

Table 1   Summary of Drill Holes – Pebble Project

	No. of Holes	Feet	Metres
By Operator
Cominco (Teck) 1	164	75,741.0	23,086
Northern Dynasty	578	495,069.5	150,897
Pebble Partnership 2	606	465,957.7	142,024
FMMUSA	7	5,450.0	1,661
Total	1,355	1,042,218.2	317,668
By Type
Core 1,5	1,132	1,023,297.6	311,901
Percussion 6	223	18,920.6	5,767
Total	1,355	1,042,218.2	317,668
By Year
1988 1	26	7,601.5	2,317
1989 1	27	7,422.0	2,262
1990	25	10,021.0	3,054
1991	48	28,129.0	8,574
1992	14	6,609.0	2,014
1993	4	1,263.0	385
1997	20	14,695.5	4,479
2002	68	37,236.8	11,350
2003	67	71,226.6	21,710
2004	267	165,567.7	50,465
2005	114	81,978.5	24,987
2006 3	48	72,826.9	22,198
2007 4	92	167,666.9	51,105
2008 5	241	184,726.4	56,305
2009	33	34,947.5	10,652
2010	66	57,582.0	17,551
2011	85	50,767.7	15,474
2012	81	35,760.2	10,900
2013	29	6,190.0	1,887
Total	1,355	1,042,218.2	317,668

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 21

 

	No. of Holes	Feet	Metres
By Area
East	149	450,047.3	137,174
West	447	349,128.7	106,414
Main 7	77	7,712.4	2,351
NW	195	46,663.9	14,223
North	76	29,840.0	9,095
NE	15	1,495.0	456
South	117	48,387.8	14,749
25 Zone	8	4,047.0	1,234
37 Zone	7	4,252.0	1,296
38 Zone	20	14,221.5	4,335
52 Zone	5	2,534.0	772
308 Zone	1	879.0	268
Eastern	5	621.5	189
Southern	147	64,374.4	19,621
SW	39	6,658.8	2,030
Sill	39	10,445.5	3,184
Cook Inlet	8	909.5	277
Total	1,355	1,042,218.2	317,668

Notes to table:

1. Includes holes drilled on the Sill prospect.

2. Holes started by Northern Dynasty and finished by the Pebble Partnership are included as the Pebble Partnership.

3. Drill holes counted in the year in which they were completed.

4. Wedged holes are counted as a single hole including full length of all wedges drilled.

5. Includes FMMUSA drill holes; data acquired in 2010.

6. Percussion holes were drilled for engineering and environmental purposes. Shallow (<15 ft) auger holes not included.

7. Comprises holes drilled entirely in Tertiary cover rocks within the Pebble West and Pebble East areas.

Some numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding.

Sampling, Analysis and Security of Samples

The Pebble deposit has been explored by extensive core drilling, with 80,859 samples having been taken from drill core for assay analysis. Nearly all potentially mineralized Cretaceous core drilled and recovered has been sampled by halving in 10 ft lengths. Similarly, all core recovered from the Late Cretaceous to Early Tertiary cover sequence has also been sampled, typically on 20 ft sample lengths, with some shorter sample intervals in areas of geologic interest. Unconsolidated overburden material, where it exists, is generally not recovered by core drilling and therefore not usually sampled.

Rock chips from the 223 rotary percussion holes were generally not sampled for assay analysis, as the holes were drilled for monitoring wells and environmental purposes. Only 35 samples were taken from the drill chips of 26 rotary percussion holes outside the Pebble deposit area, which were drilled for condemnation purposes.

Analytical work in 2002 and from 2004 to 2013 was completed by ALS Minerals Laboratories of North Vancouver, an ISO 9002 certified laboratory. Analytical work for the 2003 drilling program was completed by SGS Canada Inc. of Toronto, ON, an ISO 9002 registered, ISO 17025 accredited laboratory.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 22

 

Northern Dynasty maintained an effective Quality Control/Quality Assurance (“QA/QC”) program consistent with industry best practices, which was continued from 2007 to 2013 under the Pebble Partnership. This program is in addition to the QA/QC procedures used internally by the analytical laboratories. The QA/QC program has also been subject to independent review by Analytical Laboratory Consultants Ltd. and Nicholson Analytical Consulting. The analytical consultants provide ongoing monitoring, including facility inspection and timely reporting of the performance of standards, blanks and duplicates in the sampling and analytical program. The results of this program indicate that analytical results are of a high quality, suitable for use in detailed modelling and resource evaluation studies. The QA/QC sample types used in the program are described in the table below.

Table 2    Summary of Quality Control/Quality Assurance Sampling – Pebble Project

QC Code	Sample Type	Description	% of Total
MS	Regular Mainstream	Regular samples submitted for preparation and analysis at the primary laboratory.	89%
ST	Standard (Certified Reference Material)	Mineralized material in pulverized form with a known concentration and distribution of element(s) of interest. Randomly inserted using pre-numbered sample tags.	4.5% or 9 in 200
DP	Duplicate or Replicate	An additional split taken from the remaining pulp reject, coarse reject, ¼ core or ½ core remainder. Random selection using pre-numbered sample tags.	4.5% or 9 in 200
SD	Standard Duplicate	Standard reference sample submitted with duplicates and replicates to the check laboratory.	<1%
BL	Blank	Sample containing negligible or background amounts of elements of interest, to test for contamination.	2% 1 in 50

Core was boxed at the rig and transported daily by helicopter to the secure logging facility in Iliamna. Half cores remaining after sampling were replaced in the original core boxes and stored at Iliamna, AK in a secure compound. Crushed reject samples from the 2006 through 2013 analytical programs are stored in locked containers at Delta Junction, AK. Drill core assay pulps from the 1989 through 2013 programs are stored at a secure warehouse in Langley, BC.

Mineral Resources

The current estimate of the mineral resources in the Pebble deposit is based on approximately 59,000 assays obtained from 699 drill holes completed to the end of 2013. The resource tabulated below was estimated using ordinary kriging by David Gaunt, P.Geo., a qualified person who is not independent of Northern Dynasty. The effective date of the estimate is December 22, 2017.

The tabulation is based on copper equivalency that incorporates the contribution of copper, gold and molybdenum. Although the estimate includes silver, it was not used as part of the copper equivalency (CuEQ) calculation in order to facilitate comparison with previous estimates, which did not consider the silver content or its potential economic contribution.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 23

 

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Measured and Indicated Resources

This section uses the terms, “measured resources” and “indicated resources”. The Company advises investors that while those terms are recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) does not recognize them. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of mineral deposits in these categories will ever be converted into reserves.

Table 3    Mineral Resources – Pebble Deposit

 Measured and Indicated Categories

Threshold CuEq %	CuEq%	Tonnes	Cu (%)	Au (g/t)	Mo (ppm)	Ag (g/t)
Measured
0.3	0.65	527,000,000	0.33	0.35	178	1.7
0.4	0.66	508,000,000	0.34	0.36	180	1.7
0.6	0.77	279,000,000	0.40	0.42	203	1.8
1.0	1.16	28,000,000	0.62	0.62	302	2.3
Indicated
0.3	0.77	5,929,000,000	0.41	0.34	246	1.7
0.4	0.82	5,185,000,000	0.45	0.35	261	1.8
0.6	0.99	3,455,000,000	0.55	0.41	299	2.0
1.0	1.29	1,412,000,000	0.77	0.51	343	2.4
Measured and Indicated
0.3	0.76	6,456,000,000	0.40	0.34	240	1.7
0.4	0.81	5,693,000,000	0.44	0.35	253	1.8
0.6	0.97	3,734,000,000	0.54	0.41	291	2.0
1.0	1.29	1,440,000,000	0.76	0.51	342	2.4

Cautionary Note to Investors Concerning Estimates of Inferred Resources

This section also uses the term “inferred mineral resources”. The Company advises investors that while this term is recognized and required by Canadian regulations, the SEC does not recognize it. “Inferred mineral resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and great uncertainty as to their economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of a mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of Inferred Mineral Resources may not form the basis of economic studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that all or any part of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable. 

Table 4    Mineral Resources – Pebble Deposit

 Inferred Category

Threshold CuEq %	CuEq%	Tonnes	Cu (%)	Au (g/t)	Mo (ppm)	Ag (g/t)
0.3	0.55	4,454,000,000	0.25	0.25	226	1.2
0.4	0.68	2,646,000,000	0.33	0.30	269	1.4
0.6	0.89	1,314,000,000	0.48	0.37	292	1.8
1.0	1.20	361,000,000	0.68	0.45	377	2.3

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 24

 

The tabulated mineral resources are subject to the notes below:

These resource estimates have been prepared in accordance with NI 43-101 and the CIM Definition Standards. Inferred resources have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence and whether they can be mined legally or economically. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of the Inferred resources will ever be upgraded to a higher category.

Copper equivalent calculations use metal prices of US$1.85/lb for copper, US$902/oz for gold and US$12.50/lb for molybdenum, and recoveries of 85% for copper 69.6% for gold, and 77.8% for molybdenum in the Pebble West zone and 89.3% for copper, 76.8% for gold, and 83.7% for molybdenum in the Pebble East zone.

A 0.30% CuEQ cut-off is considered to be comparable to that used for porphyry deposit open pit mining operations in the Americas.

The resource estimate is constrained by a conceptual pit that was developed using a Lerchs-Grossman algorithm and is based on the parameters set out below:

Parameter		Units	Cost ($)	Value
Metal Price	Gold	$/oz	-	1,540.00
	Copper	$/lb	-	3.63
	Molybdenum	$/lb	-	12.36
	Silver	$/oz	-	20.00
Metal Recovery	Copper	%	-	91
	Gold	%	-	61
	Molybdenum	%	-	81
	Silver	%	-	67
Operating Cost	Mining (mineralized material or waste)	$/ton mined	1.01	-
	Added haul lift from depth	$/ton/bench	0.03	-
	Process
	-Process cost adjusted by total crushing energy	$/ton milled	4.40	-
	-Transportation	$/ton milled	0.46	-
	-Environmental	$/ton milled	0.70	-
	-G&A	$/ton milled	1.18	-
Block Model	Current block model	ft	-	75 x 75 x 50
Density	Mineralized material and waste rock	-	-	Block model
Pit Slope Angles	-	degrees	-	42

These mineral resource estimates may ultimately be affected by a broad range of environmental, permitting, legal, title, socio-economic, marketing and political factors commensurate with the specific characteristics of the Pebble deposit (including its scale, location, orientation and poly-metallic nature) as well as its setting (from a natural, social, jurisdictional and political perspective).

Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing

Metallurgical testwork for the Pebble Project was initiated by Northern Dynasty in 2003, and continued under the direction of Northern Dynasty until 2008. From 2008 to 2013, metallurgical testwork progressed under the direction of the Pebble Partnership.

Geometallurgical studies were initiated by the Pebble Partnership in 2008, and continued through 2012. The principal objective of this work was to quantify significant differences in metal deportment that may result in variations in metal recoveries during mineral processing. The results of the geometallurgical studies indicate that the deposit comprises several geometallurgical (or material type) domains. These domains are defined by distinct, internally consistent copper and gold deportment characteristics that correspond spatially with changes in silicate alteration mineralogy.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 25

 

Metallurgical testwork and associated analytical procedures were performed by recognized testing facilities with extensive experience with these analyses, with this type of deposit, and with the Pebble Project. The samples selected for the comminution, copper/gold/molybdenum bulk flotation, and copper molybdenum separation testing were representative of the various types and styles of mineralization present at the Pebble deposit.

The test results on variability samples derived from the 103 lock cycle flotation tests indicate that marketable copper and molybdenum concentrates can be produced with gold and silver contents that meet or exceed payable levels in representative smelter contracts.

Metal recoveries³ projected in the 2014 technical report are based on the locked-cycle test (LCT) results of the variability samples, and associated gold leach testwork. This has been updated since the recent decision that the cyanide leaching and SART process will not be used in metal recovery. The flotation tests on composite samples indicate a general increase of metal recoveries when the primary grind size is reduced. Thus, a finer primary grind size P₈₀ of 125µm was incorporated into the metal recovery projection model. Table 5 provides projected metals recoveries via flotation concentration only.

Table 5   Projected Metallurgical Recoveries

Domain	Flotation Recovery %
	Cu Con, 26% Cu			Mo Con
	Cu	Au	Ag	Mo
Supergene:
Sodic Potassic	78.7	63.6	67.5	53.9
Illite Pyrite	72.1	46.5	67.8	66.3
Hypgoene:
Illite Pyrite	89.8	45.6	66.6	76.1
Sodic Potassic	90.1	63.2	67.0	80.1
K Silicate	93.7	63.6	66.5	85.4
QP	94.7	65.2	64.4	80.4
Sercite	89.6	40.6	66.5	75.9
QSP	89.8	32.9	66.9	86.1

Environmental and Socioeconomic

The Pebble deposit is located on state land that has been specifically designated for mineral exploration and development. The project area has been the subject of two comprehensive land-use planning exercises conducted by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (the “ADNR”), the first in the 1980s and the second completed in 2005. The ADNR identified five land parcels (including Pebble) within the Bristol Bay planning area as having “significant mineral potential,” and where the planning intent is to accommodate mineral exploration and development. These parcels total 2.7% of the total planning area (ADNR, 2005).

Environmental standards and permitting requirements in Alaska are stable, objective, rigorous and science-driven. These features are an asset to projects like Pebble that are being designed to meet U.S. and international best practice standards of design and performance.

³ Silver recovery projection based on a dataset of 10 LCT samples

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 26

 

Environmental Baseline Studies

Northern Dynasty and its partners carried out extensive field study programs from 2004 onward to characterize the existing physical, chemical, biological, and social environments in the Bristol Bay and Cook Inlet areas where the Pebble Project might occur. The Pebble Partnership compiled the data for the 2004-2008 study period into a multi-volume Environmental Baseline Document (“EBD”). These studies have been designed to:

• Fully characterize the existing biophysical and socioeconomic environment;

• Support environmental analyses required for effective input into Project design;

• Provide a strong foundation for internal environmental and social impact assessment to support corporate decision-making;

• Provide the information required for stakeholder consultation and eventual mine permitting in Alaska; and,

• Provide a baseline for long-term monitoring of potential changes associated with mine development.

The baseline study program includes:

•     surface water	•     wildlife
•     groundwater	•     air quality
•     surface and groundwater quality	•     cultural resources
•     geochemistry	•     subsistence
•     snow surveys	•     land use
•     fish and aquatic resources	•     recreation
•     noise	•     socioeconomics
•     wetlands	•     visual aesthetics
•     trace elements	•     climate and meteorology
•     fish habitat – stream flow modeling	•     Iliamna Lake
•     marine

Additional environmental baseline studies were undertaken between 2009 and 2012. The results of these studies are being compiled into a supplemental EBD. In 2017, select environmental baseline studies were re-initiated and expanded.

Potential Environmental Effects and Proposed Mitigation Measures

The application of sound engineering, environmental planning and best management practices, including compliance with existing US federal and state environmental laws, regulations and guidelines, will ensure that environmental issues associated with the development and operation of the Pebble Project can be effectively addressed and managed.

The major environmental components include air, water and terrestrial resources. During the preliminary stages of the Pebble Project, Northern Dynasty identified key environmental issues and design drivers that have formed the basis of baseline data collection, environmental and social analysis and continuing stakeholder consultations influencing the Pebble Project design. The scoping-level assessment has confirmed these as important issues and design drivers, and has identified mitigation measures for each. The key mitigation strategies for these drivers include:

• Water: development of a water management plan that maximizes the collection and diversion of groundwater, snowmelt and direct precipitation away from the mine site;

• Wetlands: avoidance and minimization of project effects on wetlands and implementation of a water management plan (in accordance with USACE guidelines and regulations) to protect wetlands;

• Aquatic habitats: development of a water management plan and habitat mitigation measures that includes strategies to effectively manage the release of treated water in compliance with anticipated regulatory requirements to sustain necessary downstream flows and to protect downstream fish habitat and aquatic environments;

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 27

 

• Air quality: implementation of air emissions and dust suppression strategies;

• Marine environment: minimize the port facility’s footprint in the intertidal zone, particularly in soft sediment intertidal areas; and

• Compensatory mitigation measures to ensure compliance with the CWA.

Direct integration of these and other appropriate measures into the Pebble Project design and operational strategies are expected to effectively mitigate possible environmental effects and minimize residual environmental effects associated with the construction, operation and eventual closure of any proposed mine at the Pebble Project.

Community Consultation and Stakeholder Relations

Since 2004, the Pebble Partnership and its predecessor Northern Dynasty have undertaken a comprehensive stakeholder relations and community outreach program. In addition to ensuring that relevant stakeholder groups and individuals receive early notification of all work programs, the objectives of the Pebble Partnership’s stakeholder and community relations program are:

• To provide regular progress updates on project-related activities, opportunities and planning;

• To seek input on stakeholder priorities, issues and concerns, and provide feedback on how they are being addressed;

• To educate stakeholders on responsible resource development and modern mining principles and practices;

• To maximize economic and community benefits associated with the Pebble Project, both in the exploration and development phase and during mine operations; and,

• To provide opportunities for two-way dialogue and the development of long-term, respectful and mutually beneficial relationships.

The Pebble Partnership has developed a dedicated and knowledgeable stakeholder relations team to implement this program.

2017 Mine Planning and Project Description

The Pebble Partnership filed a CWA 404 permitting application with USACE in December 2017, and in January 2018, USACE confirmed that Pebble’s permitting application was complete and an EIS is required to comply with its NEPA review of the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty completed a PEA on the Pebble Project in February 2011 and, since that time after considering stakeholder and regulatory feedback, submitted for federal permitting a proposed project with a substantially smaller mine facility footprint and with other material revisions. As a result, the economic analysis included in the 2011 PEA is considered by Northern Dynasty to be out of date such that it can no longer be relied upon. In light of the foregoing, the Pebble Project is no longer an advanced property for the purposes of NI 43-101, as the potential economic viability of the Pebble Project is not currently supported by a PEA, pre-feasibility study or feasibility study. The EIS process currently underway by the USACE will consider alternative scenarios with respect to a number of aspects of the proposed project. Accordingly, the Company has not completed a current comprehensive economic analysis of the Pebble Project but anticipates that having a complete understanding of, and being able to properly assess all of the proposed alternatives the USACE will be considering as part of the scoping process conducted during the initial phase of the EIS will provide additional clarity with respect to the project to be evaluated so that an economic analysis can be completed.

In the Project Description in the CWA 404 permit application, it is envisaged that the Pebble copper-gold-molybdenum porphyry deposit would be developed as an open pit mine, with associated on and off-site infrastructure, including:

• a 230 megawatt power plant located at the mine site;

• an 83-mile transportation corridor from the mine site to a port site on the west side of Cook Inlet;

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 28

 

• a permanent, year-round port facility near the mouth of Amakdedori Creek on Cook Inlet; and,

• a 188-mile natural gas pipeline from the Kenai Peninsula to the Pebble Project site.

Following four years of construction activity, the proposed Pebble mine will operate for a period of 20 years. This includes 14 years of mining using conventional drill-blast-shovel operations, followed by six years of milling material from a low-grade stockpile. The mining rate will average 90 million tons per year, with 58 million tons of mineralized material going through the mill each year (160,000 tons per day), for an extremely low life-of-mine waste to mineralized material ratio of 0.1:1.

The development proposed in Pebble’s Project Description is substantially smaller than previous iterations, and presents significant new environmental safeguards, including:

• a development footprint less than half the size previously envisaged;

• the consolidation of most major site infrastructure in a single drainage (the North Fork Koktuli), and the absence of any primary mine operations in the Upper Talarik drainage;

• a more conservative Tailings Storage Facility (“TSF”) design, including enhanced buttresses, flatter slope angles and an improved factor of safety;

• separation of potentially acid generating (“PAG”) tailings from non-PAG bulk tailings for storage in a fully-lined TSF;

• no permanent waste rock piles; and

• no secondary gold recovery plant.

The project proposed in the Project Description uses a portion of the currently estimated Pebble mineral resources. This does not preclude development of additional resources in other phases of the project in the future, but such development would require additional evaluation and would be subject to separate permitting processes.

C.       Plans For 2018

Northern Dynasty’s main focuses in 2018 will be to finalize the option agreement with First Quantum and support, through the Pebble Partnership, development of an EIS in order to advance the permitting process for the Pebble Project.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 29

 

D.       Organizational Structure

Structure as at December 31, 2017:

 

Note:

U5 Resources Inc. sold its 220 claims to Pebble West Claims Corporation in February 2018.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 30

 

E.       Property, Plant and Equipment

The Company’s principal property is the Pebble Project, as discussed A. above.

The Company has approximately $809,000 in plant and equipment primarily at the Pebble Project site located in Iliamna.

The Company, through the Pebble Partnership, has leased premises in Anchorage and at the Pebble Project site and as result the Company has lease commitments which have been disclosed in the accompanying audited financial statements.

F.       Risk Factors

The securities of Northern Dynasty are highly speculative and subject to a number of risks. A prospective investor or other person reviewing Northern Dynasty for a prospective investor should not consider an investment in Northern Dynasty unless the investor is capable of sustaining an economic loss of their entire investment. The risks associated with Northern Dynasty’s business include:

Inability to Ultimately Achieve Mine Permitting and Build a Mine at the Pebble Project

The Company may ultimately be unable to secure the necessary permits under United States Federal and Alaskan State laws to build and operate a mine at the Pebble Project. There is no assurance that the EPA will not seek to undertake future regulatory action to impede or restrict the Pebble Project. In addition, there are prominent and well-organized opponents of the Pebble Project and the Company may be unable, even if we present solid scientific and technical evidence of risk mitigation, to overcome such opposition and convince governmental authorities that a mine should be permitted at the Pebble Project. The Company faces not only the permitting and regulatory issues typical of companies seeking to build a mine, but additional public and regulatory scrutiny due to its location and likely size. Accordingly, there is no assurance that the Company will obtain the required permits. The Company has filed a CWA 404 permit application with the US Army Corps of Engineers, which has triggered an EIS process under NEPA. The EIS process under NEPA, and the requirement for the Company to secure a broad range of other permits and authorizations from multiple federal and state regulatory agencies will take several years. After all permits necessary to begin construction are in hand, a number of years would be required to finance and build a mine and commence operations. During these periods, the Company would likely have no income and so would require additional financing to continue its operations. Unless and until we build a mine at the Pebble Project we will be unable to achieve revenues from operations and may not be able to sell or otherwise recover our investment in the Pebble Project, which would have a material adverse effect on the Company and an investment in the Company’s common shares.

Risk of Secure Title or Property Interest

There can be no certainty that title to any property interest acquired by the Company or any of its subsidiaries is without defects. Although the Company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure that legal title to its properties is properly documented, there can be no assurance that its property interests may not be challenged or impugned. Such property interests may be subject to prior unregistered agreements or transfers or other land claims, and title may be affected by undetected defects and adverse laws and regulations.

The Pebble Partnership’s mineral concessions at Pebble are located on State of Alaska lands specifically designated for mineral exploration and development. Alaska is a stable jurisdiction with a well-developed regulatory and legal framework for resource development and public lands management, a strong commitment to the rule of law and lengthy track record for encouraging investment in the development if its land and natural resources.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 31

 

The Pebble Project is Subject to Political and Environmental Regulatory Opposition

As is typical for a large scale mining project, the Pebble Project faces concerted opposition from many individuals and organizations who are motivated to preclude any possible mining in the Bristol Bay Watershed (“BBW”). The BBW is an important wildlife and salmon habitat area. Accordingly, one of the greatest risks to the Pebble Project is seen to be political/permitting risk which may ultimately preclude construction of a mine at Pebble. Opposition may include legal challenges to exploration and development permits, which may delay or halt development. Other tactics may also be employed by opposition groups to delay or frustrate development at Pebble, included political and public advocacy, electoral strategies, media and public outreach campaigns and protest activity.

The Pebble Partnership’s Mineral Property Interests Do Not Contain Any Ore Reserves or Any Known Body of Economic Mineralization.

Although there are known bodies of mineralization on the Pebble Project, and the Pebble Partnership has completed core drilling programs within, and adjacent to, the deposits to determine measured and indicated resources, there are currently no known reserves or body of commercially viable ore and the Pebble Project must be considered an exploration prospect only. Extensive additional work is required before Northern Dynasty or the Pebble Partnership can ascertain if any mineralization may be economic and hence constitute “ore”.

Mineral Resources Disclosed by Northern Dynasty or the Pebble Partnership for the Pebble Project are Estimates Only.

Northern Dynasty has included mineral resource estimates that have been made in accordance with National Instrument 43-101. These resource estimates are classified as “measured resources”, “indicated resources” and “inferred resources”. Northern Dynasty advises investors that while these terms are mandated by Canadian securities administrators, the US Securities and Exchange Commission does not recognize these terms. Investors are cautioned not to assume that any part or all of mineral deposits classified as “measured resources” or “indicated resources” will ever be converted into ore reserves. Further, “inferred resources” have a great amount of uncertainty as to their existence, and economic and legal feasibility. It cannot be assumed that all or any part of an inferred mineral resource will ever be upgraded to a higher category. Under Canadian rules, estimates of inferred mineral resources may not form the basis of feasibility or prefeasibility studies, except in rare cases. Investors are cautioned not to assume that part or all of an inferred resource exists, or is economically or legally mineable.

All amounts of mineral resources are estimates only, and Northern Dynasty cannot be certain that any specified level of recovery of metals from the mineralized material will in fact be realized or that the Pebble Project or any other identified mineral deposit will ever qualify as a commercially mineable (or viable) ore body that can be economically exploited. Mineralized material which is not mineral reserves does not have demonstrated economic viability. In addition, the quantity of mineral reserves and mineral resources may vary depending on, among other things, metal prices and actual results of mining. There can be no assurance that any future economic or technical assessments undertaken by the Company with respect to the Pebble Project will demonstrate positive economics or feasibility.

Negative Operating Cash Flow

The Company currently has a negative operating cash flow and will continue to have that for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, the Company will require substantial additional capital in order to fund its future exploration and development activities. The Company does not have any arrangements in place for this funding and there is no assurance that such funding will be achieved when required. Any failure to obtain additional financing or failure to achieve profitability and positive operating cash flows will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition and results of operations.

Northern Dynasty Has No History Of Earnings and No Foreseeable Earnings, and May Never Achieve Profitability or Pay Dividends.

Northern Dynasty has only had losses since inception and there can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will ever be profitable. Northern Dynasty has paid no dividends on its shares since incorporation. Northern Dynasty presently has no ability to generate earnings as its mineral properties are in the pre-development stage.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 32

 

Northern Dynasty’s Consolidated Financial Statements Have Been Prepared Assuming Northern Dynasty Will Continue on a Going Concern Basis.

Northern Dynasty’s consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the basis that Northern Dynasty will continue as a going concern. At December 31, 2017, Northern Dynasty had working capital of approximately $56.8 million. With the receipt of the early option payment from First Quantum, Northern Dynasty is required to utilize these funds solely for permitting related expenditures at the Pebble Project. Northern Dynasty has prioritized the allocation of the remaining available financial resources in order to meet key corporate and Pebble Project expenditure requirements in the near term. Additional financing will be required for continued corporate expenditures and material expenditures at the Pebble Project. Northern Dynasty’s continuing operations and the underlying value and recoverability of the amounts shown for mineral property interest are entirely dependent upon the existence of economically recoverable mineral reserves at the Pebble Project, the ability of the Company to finance the completion of the exploration and development of the Pebble Project, the Pebble Partnership obtaining the necessary permits to mine, and on future profitable production at the Pebble Project. Furthermore, failure to continue as a going concern would require that Northern Dynasty’s assets and liabilities be restated on a liquidation basis, which would likely differ significantly from their going concern assumption carrying values.

As the Pebble Project is Northern Dynasty’s Only Mineral Property Interest, the Failure to establish that the Pebble Project Possesses Commercially Viable and Legally Mineable Deposits of Ore May Cause a Significant Decline in the Trading Price of Northern Dynasty’s Common Shares and Reduce Its Ability to Obtain New Financing.

The Pebble Project is Northern Dynasty’s only mineral project. Northern Dynasty’s principal business objective is to carry out further exploration and related activities to establish whether the Pebble Project possesses commercially viable deposits of ore. If Northern Dynasty is not successful in its plan of operations, Northern Dynasty may have to seek a new mineral property to explore or acquire an interest in a new mineral property or project. Northern Dynasty anticipates that such an outcome would adversely impact the price of Northern Dynasty’s common shares. Furthermore, Northern Dynasty anticipates that its ability to raise additional financing to fund exploration of a new property or the acquisition of a new property or project would be impaired as a result of the failure to establish commercial viability of the Pebble Project.

If Prices for Copper, Gold, Molybdenum and Silver Decline, Northern Dynasty May Not Be Able to Raise the Additional Financing Required to Fund Expenditures for the Pebble Project.

The ability of Northern Dynasty to raise financing to fund the Pebble Project, will be significantly affected by changes in the market price of the metals for which it explores. The prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver are volatile, and are affected by numerous factors beyond Northern Dynasty’s control. The level of interest rates, the rate of inflation, the world supplies of and demands for copper, gold, molybdenum and silver and the stability of exchange rates can all cause fluctuations in these prices. Such external economic factors are influenced by changes in international investment patterns and monetary systems and political developments. The prices of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver have fluctuated in recent years, and future significant price declines could cause investors to be unprepared to finance exploration of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver, with the result that Northern Dynasty may not have sufficient financing with which to fund its exploration activities.

Mining is Inherently Dangerous and subject to Conditions or Events beyond the Company’s control, which could have a Material Adverse Effect on the Company’s Business.

Hazards such as fire, explosion, floods, structural collapses, industrial accidents, unusual or unexpected geological conditions, ground control problems, power outages, inclement weather, seismic activity, cave-ins and mechanical equipment failure are inherent risks in the Company’s exploration, development and mining operations. These and other hazards may cause injuries or death to employees, contractors or other persons at the Company’s mineral properties, severe damage to and destruction of the Company’s property, plant and equipment and mineral properties, and contamination of, or damage to, the environment, and may result in the suspension of the Company’s exploration and development activities and any future production activities. Safety measures implemented by the Company may not be successful in preventing or mitigating future accidents.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 33

 

Northern Dynasty Competes with Larger, Better Capitalized Competitors in the Mining Industry.

The mining industry is competitive in all of its phases, including financing, technical resources, personnel and property acquisition. It requires significant capital, technical resources, personnel and operational experience to effectively compete in the mining industry. Because of the high costs associated with exploration, the expertise required to analyze a project’s potential and the capital required to develop a mine, larger companies with significant resources may have a competitive advantage over Northern Dynasty. Northern Dynasty faces strong competition from other mining companies, some with greater financial resources, operational experience and technical capabilities than Northern Dynasty possesses. As a result of this competition, Northern Dynasty may be unable to maintain or acquire financing, personnel, technical resources or attractive mining properties on terms Northern Dynasty considers acceptable or at all.

Compliance with Environmental Requirements will take Considerable Resources and Changes to these Requirements Could Significantly Increase the Costs of Developing the Pebble Project and Could Delay these Activities.

The Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty must comply with stringent environmental legislation in carrying out work on the Pebble Project. Environmental legislation is evolving in a manner that will require stricter standards and enforcement, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance, more stringent environmental assessments of proposed projects and a heightened degree of responsibility for companies and their officers, directors and employees. Changes in environmental legislation could increase the cost to the Pebble Partnership of carrying out its exploration and, if warranted, development of the Pebble Project. Further, compliance with new or additional environmental legislation may result in delays to the exploration and, if warranted, development activities.

Changes in Government Regulations or the Application Thereof and the Presence of Unknown Environmental Hazards on Northern Dynasty’s Mineral Properties May Result in Significant Unanticipated Compliance and Reclamation Costs.

Government regulations relating to mineral rights tenure, permission to disturb areas and the right to operate can adversely affect Northern Dynasty. Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership may not be able to obtain all necessary licenses and permits that may be required to carry out exploration at our projects. Obtaining the necessary governmental permits is a complex, time-consuming and costly process. The duration and success of efforts to obtain permits are contingent upon many variables not within our control. Obtaining environmental permits may increase costs and cause delays depending on the nature of the activity to be permitted and the interpretation of applicable requirements implemented by the permitting authority. There can be no assurance that all necessary approvals and permits will be obtained and, if obtained, that the costs involved will not exceed those that we previously estimated. It is possible that the costs and delays associated with the compliance with such standards and regulations could become such that we would not proceed with the development or operation of a mine at the Pebble Project.

Litigation

The Company was until recently, and may in future be subject to legal proceedings, including with regard to actions in Item 12 Other Matters in the pursuit of its Pebble Project. Given the uncertain nature of these actions, the Company cannot reasonably predict the outcome thereof. If the Company is unable to resolve these matters favorably it will likely have a material adverse effect on the Company.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 34

 

Northern Dynasty is Subject to Many Risks that Are Not Insurable and, as a Result, Northern Dynasty Will Not Be Able to Recover Losses Through Insurance Should Certain Events Occur.

Hazards such as unusual or unexpected geological formations and other conditions are involved in mineral exploration and development. Northern Dynasty may become subject to liability for pollution, cave-ins or hazards against which it cannot insure. The payment of such liabilities could result in increase in Northern Dynasty’s operating expenses which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on Northern Dynasty’s financial position and its results of operations. Although Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership maintain liability insurance in an amount which we consider adequate, the nature of these risks is such that the liabilities might exceed policy limits, the liabilities and hazards might not be insurable against, or Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership might elect not to insure itself against such liabilities due to high premium costs or other reasons, in which event Northern Dynasty could incur significant liabilities and costs that could materially increase Northern Dynasty’s operating expenses.

If Northern Dynasty Loses the Services of Key Personnel that It Engages to Undertake Its Activities, then Northern Dynasty’s Plan of Operations May Be Delayed or Be More Expensive to Undertake than Anticipated.

Northern Dynasty’s success depends to a significant extent on the performance and continued service of certain independent contractors, including Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (“HDSI”). The Company has access to the full resources of HDSI, an experienced exploration and development firm with in-house geologists, engineers and environmental specialists, to assist in its technical review of the Pebble Project. There can be no assurance that the services of all necessary key personnel will be available when required or if obtained, that the costs involved will not exceed those that we previously estimated. It is possible that the costs and delays associated with the loss of services of key personnel could become such that we would not proceed with the development or operation of a mine at the Pebble Project.

The Market Price of Northern Dynasty’s Common Shares is Subject to High Volatility and Could Cause Investor Loss.

The market price of a publicly traded stock, especially a resource issuer like Northern Dynasty, is affected by many variables in addition to those directly related to exploration successes or failures. Such factors include the general condition of markets for resource stocks, the strength of the economy generally, the availability and attractiveness of alternative investments, and the breadth of the public markets for the stock. The effect of these and other factors on the market price of the Company’s common shares suggests Northern Dynasty’s shares will continue to be volatile. Therefore, investors could suffer significant losses if Northern Dynasty’s shares are depressed or illiquid when an investor needs to sell Northern Dynasty shares.

Northern Dynasty Will Require Additional Funding to Meet the Development Objectives of the Pebble Project.

Northern Dynasty will need to raise additional financing (share issuances, debt or asset level partnering) to achieve permitting and development of the Pebble Project. In addition, a positive production decision at the Pebble Project would require significant capital for project engineering and construction. Accordingly, the continuing development of the Pebble Project will depend upon Northern Dynasty’s ability to obtain financing through debt financing, equity financing, the joint venturing of the project, or other means. There can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will be successful in obtaining the required financing, or that it will be able to raise the funds on terms that do not result in high levels of dilution to shareholders.

Inability to Complete the First Quantum Transaction

The successful completion of a partnering transaction is subject to risks related to the satisfactory completion of due diligence and negotiations, including finalization of definitive agreements and fulfilment of conditions precedent therein, including receipt of all necessary approvals. The transaction may not be successfully completed or completed on terms satisfactory to the Company. Accordingly, the continuation of current and proposed permitting activities and the development of the Pebble Project may depend upon Northern Dynasty’s ability to complete the transaction. There can be no assurance that Northern Dynasty will be successful in that regard, failing which the continuation of these activities will require that the Company secure additional financing from alternative sources (see above).

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 35

 

Item 6. Dividends

The Company has not paid any dividends on any of its shares since incorporation and does not presently have any intention of paying dividends.

Item 7. Description of Capital Structure

Northern Dynasty’s share capital consists of one class only, namely common shares without par value, of which an unlimited number of shares are authorized and 308,237,856 common shares without par value were issued and outstanding as fully paid and non-assessable as of December 31, 2017. As of March 28, 2018, there were 311,816,308 common shares issued and outstanding as fully paid and non-assessable. The audited consolidated annual financial statements provide share issuances effected by Northern Dynasty and the weighted average issue price for shares since January 1, 2016.

There have been no changes in the classification of common shares (reclassifications, consolidations, reverse splits or the like) within the previous five years. All common shares of Northern Dynasty rank pari passu (i.e. equally) for voting and the payment of any dividends and distributions in the event of a windup.

There are no constraints imposed on the ownership of securities of Northern Dynasty.

Northern Dynasty’s securities have not received any ratings from any rating organization.

Northern Dynasty has entered in registration rights agreements with certain United States shareholders as part of past financing activities. See the Company’s US public filings at www.sec.gov.

Item 8. Market for Securities

Trading Markets

Northern Dynasty’s common shares have been listed in Canada on the TSX since October 2007, under the symbol NDM.

The Company’s common shares have traded in the US on NYSE American (formerly NYSE MKT), since November 2004, under the symbol NAK.

The following tables set forth for the periods indicated the price history of the Company’s common shares on the TSX and on the NYSE American. Share trading information is available through free internet search services (for example, for TSX, refer to www.tmxmoney.com, enter NDM.TO. For NYSE American, use the following: https://www.nyse.com/listings_directory/stock, enter NAK).

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 36

 

	Trading under the symbol NDM on the TSX			Trading under the symbol NAK on the NYSE American
Fiscal Year Ended December 31,	High ($)	Low ($)	Average daily trading volume	High (US$)	Low (US$)	Average daily trading volume
2017	4.54	1.43	1,700,010	3.45	1.06	5,399,128
2016	3.12	0.28	775,654	2.50	0.20	1,295,079
2015	0.83	0.37	55,058	0.72	0.28	103,728
2014	1.85	0.38	56,803	1.70	0.32	204,562
2013	4.19	1.07	75,913	4.26	1.00	271,510
2012	8.13	2.23	116,593	8.19	2.20	269,042

	Trading under the symbol NDM on the TSX			Trading under the symbol NAK on the NYSE American
Fiscal Quarter	High ($)	Low ($)	Average daily trading  volume	High (US$)	Low (US$)	Average daily  trading  volume
Q4 2017	2.99	2.10	894,841	2.34	1.63	3,755,204
Q3 2017	2.43	1.56	624,536	1.99	1.21	2,712,871
Q2 2017	3.30	1.63	1,731,369	2.42	1.21	5,393,605
Q1 2017	4.54	1.43	3,519,441	3.45	1.06	9,804,762
Q4 2016	3.12	0.71	1,402,529	2.50	0.54	2,862,494
Q3 2016	1.48	0.39	1,186,214	1.16	0.30	1,871,322
Q2 2016	0.57	0.37	314,544	0.48	0.28	258,189
Q1 2016	0.52	0.28	207,582	0.39	0.20	159,575

	Trading under the symbol NDM on the TSX			Trading under the symbol NAK on the NYSE American
Last twelve months	High ($)	Low ($)	Average daily  trading  volume	High (US$)	Low (US$)	Average daily trading  volume
February 2018	1.63	1.00	551,741	1.30	0.81	2,860,541
January 2018	2.32	1.20	657,801	1.86	0.96	3,838,950
December 2017	2.99	2.10	925,002	2.30	1.63	4,034,057
November 2017	2.98	2.28	975,315	2.34	1.78	3,659,186
October 2017	2.80	2.11	783,248	2.25	1.69	3,593,356
September 2017	2.43	2.08	678,996	1.99	1.68	2,774,650
August 2017	2.31	1.72	574,985	1.85	1.34	2,543,608
July 2017	2.13	1.56	624,582	1.64	1.21	2,674,778
June 2017	2.64	1.76	941,021	1.97	1.34	3,587,569
May 2017	3.30	1.90	2,337,058	2.42	1.37	8,002,637
April 2017	2.46	1.63	1,945,186	1.85	1.21	4,463,821
March 2017	2.22	1.43	2,054,343	1.67	1.06	5,526,687

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 37

 

Item 9. Escrowed Securities

Following the Company’s acquisition of Mission Gold Ltd. on December 24, 2015 there are currently 1,628,671  common shares in the capital of the Company held in escrow pursuant to TSX-V value escrow agreements and supplemental escrow agreements dated February 13, 2013 among Delta Gold Corporation, a predecessor company to Mission Gold Ltd. (the “issuer”), Olympia Trust Company and the holders of the escrowed shares.

In addition to the applicable TSX-V time-based release conditions, the supplemental escrow agreements provide, among other things, that the escrowed shares shall not be released from escrow until the issuer has obtained requisite permits authorizing exploration and development activities at the issuer’s Imperial Project which would allow the issuer to complete the drilling component of the Phase 1 recommended work program as set out in the issuer’s filing statement dated December 28, 2012. The issuer has provided to the TSX-V written notice that it has sufficient time to raise funds and to incur costs and expenses to meet its contractual obligations in respect of expenditures required to be incurred on the issuer’s Imperial Project pursuant to applicable contractual obligations and the TSX-V has consented to the release.

Except as outlined above, there are no shares of Northern Dynasty held in escrow.

Item 10 Directors and Officers

The names and municipalities of residence of the directors and officers of the Company, their principal occupations during the past five years, and the period of time they have served as directors or officers of Northern Dynasty are presented in the table below. Except where indicated, each director and senior officer of Northern Dynasty has held the same or similar principal occupation with the organization indicated or a predecessor thereof for the last five years. Where shown, the reference to “CEO” refers to “Chief Executive Officer” and “CFO” to “Chief Financial Officer”.

Name	Position	Director or Officer Since
Desmond M. Balakrishnan Vancouver, BC, Canada	Director	December 2015
Steven A. Decker (2)(4) Sherman Oaks, CA, United States	Director	March 2016
Robert A. Dickinson Lions Bay, BC, Canada	Chairman of the Board and Director	June 1995
Gordon B. Keep (3) Vancouver, BC, Canada	Director	October 2015
David C. Laing (3)(4) Vancouver, BC, Canada	Director	May 2016
Christian Milau (2)(4) Vancouver, BC, Canada	Director	May 2016
Kenneth W. Pickering (2)(3) Chemainus, BC, Canada	Director	September 2013
Marchand Snyman West Vancouver, BC, Canada	CFO	August 2008
Ronald W. Thiessen West Vancouver, BC, Canada	President, CEO and Director	November 1995
Trevor Thomas Vancouver, BC, Canada	Secretary	February 2008
Bruce Jenkins Vancouver, BC, Canada	Executive Vice President, Environment and Sustainability	June 2004
Stephen Hodgson Vancouver, BC, Canada	Vice President Engineering	March 2005
Sean Magee North Vancouver, BC, Canada	Vice President Public Affairs	October 2006
Doug Allen Vancouver, BC, Canada	Vice President Corporate Communications	June 2012

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 38

 

(1)	To the best of the Company’s knowledge, none of such persons has any family relationship with any other and none were elected as a director or appointed as an officer as a result of an arrangement or understanding with a major shareholder, customer, supplier, or any other party.
(2)	Member of the Audit and Risk Committee.
(3)	Member of the Compensation Committee.
(4)	Member of the Nominating and Governance Committee.

As at March 28, 2018, the directors and officers of Northern Dynasty, and their respective affiliates, directly and indirectly, own or control as a group an aggregate of 10,555,789 common shares (3.4%), or 27,208,775 common shares (8.3%) on a diluted basis.

Biographical information

The following is the biographical information on each of the persons listed above:

Desmond M. Balakrishnan BA., LLB. – Director

Mr. Balakrishnan is a lawyer practicing in the areas of Corporate Finance and Securities, Mergers and Acquisitions, Lending, Private Equity and Gaming and Entertainment for McMillan LLP, where he has been a partner since 2004. McMillan serves as the Company’s Canadian attorneys. He has been lead counsel on over $500 million in financing transactions and in mergers and acquisitions aggregating in excess of $1 billion. He also serves as a director and/or officer of several resource, finance and gaming firms. He holds CLA and BA from Simon Fraser University and a Bachelor of Laws (with Distinction) from the University of Alberta.

Mr. Balakrishnan is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	December 2015	Present
Aroway Energy Inc.	TSX-V	Director	July 2010	Present
Big Sky Petroleum Corporation	TSX-V	Director	November 2011	Present
Contagious Gaming Inc.	TSX-V	Director	August 2014	Present
Electric Metals Inc.	TSX-V	Secretary	June 2009	September 2013
Hillcrest Petroleum Ltd.	TSX-V	Secretary	January 2008	August 2015
Network Exploration Ltd.	TSX-V	Secretary	May 2008	Present
Petro Basin Energy Corp.	TSX-V (NEX)	Director	February 2012	Present
Poydras Gaming Finance Corp.	TSX-V	Secretary	April 2010	May 2014
Red Rock Capital Corp.	TSX-V (NEX)	Director	February 2012	Present
Shelby Ventures Inc.	TSX-V (NEX)	Director	December 2010	Present

Steven A. Decker, CFA – Director

Mr. Decker is a Chartered Financial Analyst® charterholder with more than 20 years of investment experience as an Analyst and Portfolio Manager. He holds an MBA in Finance from the Marshall School of Business at the University of Southern California where he received the Marcia Israel Award for Entrepreneurship and was a manager of the California Equity Fund.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 39

 

Mr. Decker is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	March 2016	Present

Robert A. Dickinson, B.Sc., M.Sc. – Chairman of the Board and Director

Mr. Dickinson is an economic geologist who has been actively involved in mineral exploration and mine development for over 45 years. He is Chairman of HDI and HDSI as well as a director and member of the management team of a number of the public companies associated with Hunter Dickinson Inc. He is also President and Director of United Mineral Services Ltd., a private resource company. He also serves as a Director of the Britannia Mine Museum and a Trustee of the BC Mineral Resources Education Program.

Mr. Dickinson is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	June 1994	Present
		Chairman	April 2004	Present
Amarc Resources Ltd.	TSX-V, OTCBB	Director	April 1993	Present
		Chairman	April 2004	Present
Heatherdale Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	November 2009	Present
Northcliff Resources Ltd.	TSX	Director	June 2011	Present
Quartz Mountain Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	December 2011	Present
		Chairman	December 2017	Present
Taseko Mines Limited	TSX, NYSE American	Director	January 1991	Present

Gordon B. Keep, B.Sc., MBA, P.Geo. – Director

Gordon Keep is a Professional Geologist with extensive business experience in investment banking and creating public natural resource companies. Mr. Keep is CEO of Fiore Management & Advisory Corp., a private financial advisory firm. He also serves as an officer and/or director for several natural resource companies. He holds a B.Sc. in Geological Science from Queen’s University and an MBA from the University of British Columbia.

Mr. Keep is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	October 2015	Present
Cannon Point Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	CEO and Director	July 2009	April 2013
Tekmodo Industries Inc. (previously CarbonOne Technologies Inc.)	TSX-V	Director	July 2015	January 2017
Catalyst Copper Corp.	TSX-V	Director	April 2008	May 2016
Eastern Platinum Limited	TSX, JSE	Director	November 2003	July 2016
Encanto Potash Corp.	TSX-V	Director	December 2008	December 2017
		Chairman	October 2009	December 2017
Klondike Gold Corp.	TSX-V	Director	December 2013	Present
Oceanic Iron Ore Corp.	TSX-V	Director	September 2010	Present
Pacific Topaz Resources Ltd.	TSX-V (NEX)	CFO and Secretary	March 2011	April 2013

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 40

 

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Pacific Topaz Resources Ltd.	TSX-V (NEX)	CFO and Secretary	March 2011	April 2013
PentaNova Energy Corp.	TSX-V	Director	July 2017	Present
Peregrine Diamonds Ltd.	TSX	Director	February 2005	July 2015
Petroamerica Oil Corp.	TSX-V	Secretary	January 2008	August 2014
Petromanas Energy Inc.	TSX-V	Director	August 2010	May 2016
PNO Resources Ltd.	TSX-V (NEX)	President and Director	July 2007	April 2013
Prima Columbia Hardwood Inc.	TSX-V	Director	July 2007	June 2013
Renaissance Oil Corp.	TSX-V	Director	September 2014	Present
Royce Resources Corp.	TSX-V (NEX)	CFO and Secretary	March 2011	April 2013
Rusoro Mining Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	July 2016	Present
Sandspring Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	March 24, 2017	Present
Skyridge Resources Ltd.	TSX-V (NEX)	Director	December 2007	April 2013
Tapango Resources Ltd.	TSX-V (NEX)	CFO and Secretary	February 2007	April 2013
Uracan Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	November 2003	Present

David Laing, BSc Mining Engineering – Director

Mr. Laing is a Mining Engineer with 40 years’ experience in mining operations, projects, engineering studies, mining finance, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, corporate development, and company building. Mr. Laing is currently the Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) of Equinox Gold Corp. and a Director of Luna Gold Corp. Prior to that, he was the COO and director of Trek Mining Inc., Luna Gold Corp. and True Gold Mining Inc. Prior to joining True Gold, Mr. Laing was COO and led the origination and execution of stream financing transactions of Quintana Resources Capital ULC, a base metals streaming company. He was also one of the original executives of Endeavour Mining Corporation as the group grew from one mine in Burkina Faso to a 500,000 ounce gold producer in West Africa. Mr. Laing was an integral part of the acquisition and integration of three junior gold producers and led the feasibility of a fourth project, in Burkina Faso. Prior to these recent roles, Mr. Laing held senior positions in mining investment banking at Standard Bank in New York, technical consulting at MRDI in California, the Refugio project at Bema Gold Corp. and various roles at Billiton and Royal Dutch Shell’s mining business.

Mr. Laing is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	May 2016	Present
Arian Silver Corporation	LSE	Director	December 2014	July 2015
Aton Resources Inc.	TSX-V	Director	May 2016	Present
CB Gold Inc.	TSX-V	Director	April 2014	August 2015
Catalyst Copper Corp.	TSX-V	President, CEO and Director	March 2014	August 2014
Fortuna Silver Mines Inc.	TSX, NYSE	Director	September 2016	Present
KBL Mining Limited	ASX	Director	March 2015	January 2016
Luna Gold Corp.2	TSX	COO and Director	August 2016	March 2017
Sandspring Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	August 2015	Present
Equinox Gold Corp.2	TSX-V	COO	December 2017	Present
Trek Mining Inc.2	TSX-V	COO and Director	March 2017	December 2017
True Gold Mining Inc. 1	TSX-V	COO	July 2015	April 2016

Note:

1.	The Company was acquired by Endeavour in April 2016 and its shares were delisted.
2.	The Company merged with TSX-V listed JDL Gold Corp. to form Trek Mining Inc. Trek Mining Inc. then merged with NewCastle Gold Ltd. and Anfield Gold Corp. to form Equinox Gold Corp.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 41

 

Christian Milau, CPA, CA, CPA (Illinois) – Director

Mr. Milau is is a Chartered Professional Accountant (Chartered Accountant). Mr Milau is Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Director of Equinox Gold Corp. Prior to this he was President and CEO of Trek Mining Inc., Luna Gold Corp. and True Gold Mining Inc. and negotiated and closed the latter’s sale to Endeavour Mining Corporation (“Endeavour”), where previously he served as Executive Vice President and CFO. While at Endeavour, Mr. Milau played a leading role in Endeavour’s acquisition, financing, development, and operation of four gold mines in Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana and Mali. Mr. Milau has finance and capital markets experience as well as operational, government and stakeholder relations experience in West Africa, including successfully negotiating with governments on various mining conventions and tax matters. Prior to these recent roles, Mr. Milau was Treasurer of New Gold Inc. during the company’s high growth period from 2008 to 2011 when he was involved in the financing and construction of the New Afton mine in British Columbia.

Mr. Milau is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	May 2016	Present
Endeavour Mining Corporation	TSX	Executive Vice President and CFO	April 2011	March 2015
Luna Gold Corp. 2	TSX	CEO and Director	August 2016	March 2017
Plateau Uranium Inc.	TSX-V	Director	June 2016	Present
Equinox Gold Corp.2	TSX-V	CEO and Director	December 2017	Present
Trek Mining Inc.2	TSX-V	CEO and Director	March 2017	December 2017
True Gold Mining Inc. 1	TSX-V	President, CEO and Director	March 2015	May 2016

Note:

1.	The Company was acquired by Endeavour in April 2016 and its shares were delisted.
2.	The Company merged with TSX-V listed JDL Gold Corp to form Trek Mining Inc. Trek Mining Inc. then merged with NewCastle Gold Ltd. and Anfield Gold Corp. to form Equinox Gold Corp.

Kenneth W. Pickering., PEng. – Director

Mr. Pickering is a Professional Engineer and mining executive with 40 years of experience in a variety of capacities in the natural resources industry. He has led the development, construction and operation of world-class mining projects in Canada, Chile, Australia, Peru and the United States, focusing on operations, executive responsibilities and country accountabilities.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 42

 

Mr. Pickering is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	September 2013	Present
Endeavour Silver Corp.	TSX, NYSE	Director	August 2012	Present
THEMAC Resources Group Limited	TSX-V	Director	March 2011	Present
Pan Aust Minerals	ASX	Director	October 2011	Present
Enaex Chile	IPSA	Director	May 2011	Present

Marchand Snyman, CA (SA), CA (Aust.) – Chief Financial Officer

Marchand Snyman is a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and of the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants. He is a director and Chief Operating Officer of HDI and a director of HDSI.

Mr. Snyman has over 18 years of experience in the mining sector. Mr. Snyman was a director of Muratie Investments Pty Limited between 2003 and 2006, an Australian mining consultant providing advisory services to businesses in Australia, China, South Africa and the USA, prior to joining HDI in 2006. Mr. Snyman was General Manager Corporate Finance and Development for Anglo Platinum Limited, the world’s premier platinum producer from 1999 – 2002, responsible for managing diverse projects including joint venture negotiations, corporate tax structures and offshore corporate operations, having joined Anglo Platinum in 1996 as Corporate Finance Manager. Prior to that, he was a senior financial advisor for a multi-modal transportation company in South Africa.

Mr. Snyman is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	August 2008	February 2016
		CFO	August 2008	Present
Northcliff Resources Ltd.	TSX	Director and Chairman	January 2013	Present

Ronald W. Thiessen, FCPA – Director, President and Chief Executive Officer

Ronald Thiessen is a Chartered Public Accountant with professional experience in finance, taxation, mergers, acquisitions and re-organizations. Since 1986, Mr. Thiessen has been involved in the acquisition and financing of mining and mineral exploration companies. Mr. Thiessen is a director of HDI and HDSI, a company providing management and administrative services to several publicly-traded companies and focuses on directing corporate development and financing activities.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 43

 

Mr. Thiessen is, or was within the past five years, an officer and/or director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Director	November 1995	Present
		President and CEO	November 2001	Present
Amarc Resources Ltd.	TSX-V, OTCBB	Director	September 1995	Present
		CEO	September 2000	Present
		President	September 2000	November 2014
Great Basin Gold Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American, JSE	Director	October 1993	June 2013
		Chairman	November 2006	June 2013
Quartz Mountain Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	President, CEO and Director	December 2011	Present
Taseko Mines Limited	TSX, NYSE American	Director	October 1993	Present
		Chairman	May 2006	Present

Trevor Thomas, LLB – Secretary

Trevor Thomas has practiced in the areas of corporate commercial, corporate finance, securities and mining law since 1995, both in private practice environment as well as in house positions and is currently general counsel for HDI. Prior to joining HDI, he served as in-house legal counsel with Placer Dome Inc.

Mr. Thomas is, or was within the past five years, an officer of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd.	TSX, NYSE American	Secretary	February 2008	Present
Amarc Resources Ltd.	TSX-V, OTCBB	Secretary	February 2008	Present
Curis Resources Ltd.	TSX	Secretary	June 2013	November 2014
Heatherdale Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Secretary	June 2013	Present
Northcliff Resources Ltd.	TSX	Secretary	June 2011	Present
Quartz Mountain Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Secretary	June 2013	Present
Rathdowney Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Secretary	March 2011	Present
Taseko Mines Limited	TSX, NYSE  American	Secretary	July 2008	Present

Bruce Jenkins – Executive Vice President, Environment and Sustainability

Bruce Jenkins is an environmental and government relations executive with more than 40 years of experience in project and corporate management. He supports the Pebble Partnership and helps guide environmental studies, mitigation planning and permitting activities. Mr. Jenkins is also Executive Vice President of Environment and Sustainability for Hunter Dickinson Inc.

Stephen Hodgson – Vice President, Engineering

Stephen Hodgson is a professional engineer with over 40 years of experience in consulting, project management, feasibility-level design and implementation, and mine operations at some of the largest mineral development projects in the world. He brings a unique perspective to the Pebble team with his experience at northern and Arctic mines. He has led the Northern Dynasty engineering team since 2005. Currently he is also Senior Vice President, Engineering and Project Director for the Pebble Limited Partnership.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 44

 

Mr. Hodgson is, or was within the past five years, a director of the following public companies:

Company	Name of Market	Positions Held	From	To
Rathdowney Resources Ltd.	TSX-V	Director	December 2011	August 2014

Sean Magee – Vice President, Public Affairs

Sean Magee is a former journalist and speech writer with more than 25 years communications experience. His experience and expertise spans the fields of government and stakeholder relations, community and First Nations/Native engagement, media relations, crisis and issues management. He has played a central role at Pebble for more than a decade. He has had a working relationship with Hunter Dickinson Inc. for over 20 years and is the company’s Executive Vice President of Strategic Communications and Public Affairs.

Doug Allen – Vice President, Corporate Communications

Doug Allen is an asset management industry specialist with more than 35 years of experience on both the sell-side and the buy-side of the investment industry. His experience includes extensive investment work in the mining industry. Mr. Allen serves as the primary liaison between the broker-dealer and asset management industries and the Company.

Committees of the Board of Directors

The following committees have been established by the members of Northern Dynasty’s board of directors:

Committee	Membership
Audit and Risk Committee	Christian Milau (Chair)
	Steven Decker
	Kenneth Pickering
Compensation Committee	Gordon Keep
	David Laing
	Kenneth Pickering (Chair)
Nominating and Governance Committee	David Laing (Chair)
	Christian Milau
	Steven Decker

The mandate of each of these committees is more particularly described in Northern Dynasty’s Corporate Governance Policies and Procedures Manual available on the Company’s website at: www.northerndynastyminerals.com.

Cease Trade Orders, Bankruptcies, Penalties or Sanctions

No director or officer of Northern Dynasty is, as of the date of this Annual Information Form, or has been within the ten years before the date of this Annual Information Form, a director or officer of any company that while that person was acting in that capacity, was the subject of a cease trade order, penalties, sanctions or bankruptcy, during the time the individual was a director or within a one year period thereafter, or was a director or officer of a company during the time in which an event occurred which led to a cease trade order, penalties, sanctions or bankruptcy subsequent to the individual ceasing to act as a director or officer. This information has been provided by each director or officer, as the Company is unable to verify these statements independently.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 45

 

As publicly disclosed at www.sedar.com, Great Basin Gold Ltd. (“GBG”), a company on whose board Mr. Thiessen formerly served, became insolvent and was liquidated commencing in September 2012. GBG was developing two gold projects using substantial debt financing when gold prices began their precipitous fall. Mr. Thiessen resigned in June 2013.

On May 21, 2013, the British Columbia Securities Commission (“BCSC”) issued a cease trade order against Rusoro Mining Ltd. (“Rusoro”), a company for which Mr. Keep serves as a director. The cease order was for the failure by Rusoro to file its audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2012 and related MD&A (“2012 Year End Disclosure”). On June 5, 2013, and June 7, 2013, respectively, similar cease trade orders were issued against Rusoro by the Ontario Securities Commission (“OSC”) and the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (“AMF”). On August 19, 2013, Rusoro filed its 2012 Year End Disclosure. On August 21, 2013, August 28, 2013 and September 4, 2013, BCSC, AMF and OSC respectively, granted full revocations of their cease trade orders. Rusoro was unable to file its 2012 Year End Disclosure by the required filing deadline because it experienced significant delays in preparing them due to the nationalization by the Venezuelan government of Rusoro’s gold mining assets in Venezuela.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Other than Mr. Decker, the directors of Northern Dynasty also serve as directors of other similar companies involved in natural resource development. Accordingly, it may occur that properties will be offered to such other companies. Furthermore, those other companies may participate in the same properties as those in which Northern Dynasty has an interest. As a result there may be situations which involve a potential conflict of interest or issues in connection with the doctrine of “corporate opportunity”. In that event, a financially interested director would not be entitled to vote at meetings of directors in respect of a transaction involving the Company if it evokes any such conflict. The directors will attempt to avoid dealing with such other companies in situations where conflicts or corporate opportunity issues might arise and will at all times use their best efforts to act in the best interests of Northern Dynasty.

Item 11. Promoters

Not applicable.

Item 12. Legal Proceedings and Regulatory Actions

Joint Settlement Agreement

From 2014-2017, Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership were focused on a multi-dimensional strategy that included legal and other initiatives designed to ward off a pre-emptive regulatory action by the EPA under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). The strategy had a successful outcome.

On May 12, 2017, Northern Dynasty announced that the Pebble Partnership and the EPA had reached a joint settlement agreement over the federal agency’s pre-emptive regulatory action. Key aspects of the agreement include:

• The EPA agreed the Pebble Project can proceed into normal course permitting under the CWA and NEPA, and that it cannot seek to utilize its authority under CWA 404(c) until such time as a final EIS has been completed by the USACE, so long as that occurs within a period of four years following the settlement agreement, and that the Pebble Partnership files permit applications within 30 months of the date of the settlement agreement.

• EPA further agreed to initiate a process to consider withdrawing the Proposed Determination (as described below) it issued under CWA 404(c) in July 2014. The beginning of this process was announced on July 11, 2017, and a public comment period concluded on October 17, 2017. EPA suspended this process in January 2018 (see discussions below under “Proposed Determination”).

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 46

 

• The Pebble Partnership agreed to terminate permanently and with prejudice three lawsuits it brought against EPA: an action under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, an action challenging EPA’s statutory authority under the CWA; and an action under the Freedom of Information Act.

A copy of the joint settlement agreement is posted under the Company’s SEDAR and EDGAR profiles at www.sedar.com and www.sec.gov, respectively.

The following is a chronology of the events and the actions and initiatives by Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership that ultimately led to the joint settlement agreement.

The Environmental Protection Agency and the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment

In February 2011, the EPA announced it would undertake a Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment study focusing on the potential effects of large-scale mine development in Bristol Bay and, specifically the Nushagak and Kvichak area drainages. This process was ostensibly initiated in response to calls from persons and groups opposing the Pebble Project for the EPA to pre-emptively use its asserted authority under Section 404(c) of the CWA to prohibit discharges of dredged or fill material in waters of the US within these drainages. However, evidence exists that the EPA may have been considering a Section 404(c) veto of the Pebble Project at least as far back as 2008 – two years before it received a petition from several Alaska Native tribes.

The EPA’s first draft Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment (“BBWA”) report was released on May 18, 2012. In the Company’s opinion after review with its consultants, the draft report is a fundamentally flawed document. By the EPA’s own admission, it evaluated the effects of a “hypothetical project” that has neither been defined nor proposed by the Pebble Partnership, and for which key environmental mitigation strategies have not yet been developed and, hence, would not yet be known. It is believed by the Company that the assessment was rushed – because it was based on studies conducted over only one year in an area of 20,000 square miles. In comparison, the Pebble Project has studied the ecological and social environment surrounding Pebble for over a decade. The EPA also failed to adequately consider the comprehensive and detailed data that the Pebble Partnership provided as part of its 27,000-page Environmental Baseline Document.

The EPA called for public comment on the quality and sufficiency of scientific information presented in the draft BBWA report. In response, the Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty made submissions on the draft report. Northern Dynasty made a presentation highlighting these shortcomings at public hearings held in Seattle, Washington, on May 31, 2012 and in Anchorage, Alaska, on August 7, 2012. In July 2012, the Company also submitted a 635-page critique of the draft report in response to the EPA’s call for public comment, and called upon the EPA to cease such unwarranted actions until such time as a definitive proposal for the development of the Pebble deposit is submitted into the NEPA permitting process.

Concerns about the reasonableness of the basis of risk assessment in the draft EPA report were stated by many of the independent experts on the peer review panel assembled to review the BBWA, as summarized, in a report entitled External Peer Review of EPA’s Draft Document: An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska released in November 2012. In a wide-ranging critique of the draft report’s methodology and findings, many peer review panellists called the EPA’s effort to evaluate the effects of a “hypothetical mining scenario” on the water, fish, wildlife and cultural resources of Southwest Alaska “inadequate”, “premature”, “unreasonable”, “suspect” and “misleading”.

On April 26, 2013, the EPA released a revised draft of the BBWA report and announced another public comment and Peer Review period. The Pebble Partnership and Northern Dynasty made submissions on the revised draft. In late May 2013, Northern Dynasty filed a 205-page submission, which describes the same major shortcomings as the original report published in May 2012.

In mid-January 2014, the EPA released the final version of its BBWA. The report still reflects many of the same fundamental shortcomings as previous drafts.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 47

 

On February 28, 2014, the EPA announced the initiation of a pre-emptive regulatory action under Section 404(c) of the CWA to consider restriction or a prohibition on mining activities associated with the Pebble deposit in order to protect aquatic resources in southwest Alaska. In late April 2014, the Pebble Partnership submitted a comprehensive response to the EPA’s February 28, 2014 notification letter.

Statutory Authority action

In late May 2014, the Pebble Partnership filed suit in the US District Court for Alaska and sought an injunction to halt the pre-emptive regulatory action initiated by the EPA under the CWA, asserting that, in the absence of a permit application, the action exceeds the federal agency’s statutory authority and violates the Alaska Statehood Act among other federal laws. The State of Alaska and Alaska Peninsula Corporation, an Alaska Native village corporation with extensive land holdings in the Pebble Project area, later joined in the Pebble Partnership’s lawsuit against the EPA as co-plaintiffs. On September 26, 2014, a US federal court in Alaska granted the EPA’s motion to dismiss the case. This ruling did not judge the merits of the statutory authority case, it only deferred that hearing and judgment until after a final Section 404(c) determination has been made by the EPA. The Company also appealed the decision to grant the motion to dismiss to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This appeal was denied in May 2015. The Pebble Partnership retained the option to pursue its statutory authority case in the instance that EPA finalized a pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA, but this right was waived under the terms of the joint settlement agreement.

Proposed Determination

On July 18, 2014, EPA Region 10 announced a “Proposed Determination” to restrict the discharge of dredged or fill material associated with mining the Pebble deposit in a 268 square mile area should that disposal result in any of the following: loss of five or more miles of streams with documented salmon occurrence; loss of 19 or more miles of streams where salmon are not documented but that are tributaries of streams with documented salmon occurrence; the loss of 1,100 or more acres of wetlands, lakes, and ponds that connect with streams with documented salmon occurrence or tributaries of those streams; and stream flow alterations greater than 20 percent of daily flow in nine or more linear miles of streams with documented salmon occurrence. Northern Dynasty management did not accept that the EPA has the statutory authority to impose conditions on development at Pebble, or any development project anywhere in Alaska or the US, prior to the formal submission of a development plan and its thorough review by federal and state agencies including development of an Environmental Impact Statement and review under NEPA.

On September 19, 2014, the Pebble Partnership submitted a comprehensive legal and technical response to EPA Region 10’s Proposed Determination. Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership maintained that the Proposed Determination is flawed and unsupported by the administrative record as established by the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment, and was therefore arbitrary and capricious.

As part of the settlement agreement announced on May 12, 2017, EPA agreed to initiate a process to withdraw the Proposed Determination that would have restricted the development of the Pebble Project. The beginning of this process was announced on July 11, 2017, and a public comment period concluded on October 17, 2017. On January 29, 2018, the Company announced that it acknowledged a statement issued by the EPA on January 26, 2018 indicating that the federal agency will continue to support Pebble’s due process rights agreed to in the settlement agreement to allow for normal course permitting although it has suspended the process to consider the withdrawal of the pre-emptive regulatory action under CWA 404(c) in July 2014.

Federal Advisory Committee Act (“FACA”) action

On September 3, 2014, the Pebble Partnership initiated a second action against EPA in federal district court in Alaska charging that EPA violated the FACA due to the federal agency’s close interactions with, and the undue influence of Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations and anti-mining activists in developing the BBWA, and with respect to its unprecedented pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA. On September 24, 2014, the US federal court judge in Alaska released an order recognizing that the EPA agreed not to take the next step to advance its 404(c) regulatory action with respect to southwest Alaska’s Pebble Project until at least January 2, 2015.

Preliminary Injunction

On November 24, 2014, a US federal court judge in Alaska granted the Pebble Partnership’s request for a preliminary injunction in relation to the FACA case. While the preliminary injunction did not resolve the Pebble Partnership’s claims that the EPA actions with respect to the BBWA and subsequent 404(c) regulatory action violated FACA, the decision permitted the further discovery process of the underlying facts to enable the court to issue a final decision on the merits of the FACA case. Granting of a preliminary injunction also reflected the court’s view that PLP had a likelihood of prevailing on the merits of its case. On June 4, 2015, the federal court in Alaska issued an order denying the EPA’s motion to dismiss this case.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 48

 

The Pebble Partnership filed numerous requests for production of documents and received tens of thousands of documents produced by the EPA. The Pebble Partnership also served a number of notices of depositions for current and former EPA employees, EPA contractors and relevant third parties. More than a dozen depositions of EPA witnesses were completed. Additionally, the Pebble Partnership had asked the Court to compel the Agency and certain third parties to produce documents relevant to its FACA claims that are being improperly withheld. Had the Pebble Partnership prevailed in its FACA litigation against the EPA, the federal agency may have been unable to rely upon the BBWA as part of the administrative record for any regulatory action at the Pebble Project.

On October 27, 2016, the Pebble Partnership and the EPA filed a joint Notice in federal court stating their intent to enter into mediation in an effort to resolve ongoing litigation under FACA.

The Pebble Partnership and the EPA filed several joint Notices in federal court to stay the ongoing FACA litigation between December 30, 2016 and May 11, 2017, although the Court’s November 2014 Preliminary Injunction remained in effect. During this period, the Pebble Partnership and the EPA engaged in direct discussions, which led to the joint settlement agreement announced on May 12, 2017.

Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) action

On October 14, 2014, the Pebble Partnership filed suit in federal district court in Alaska charging that EPA has violated the FOIA by improperly withholding documents related to the Pebble Project, the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment and consideration of a pre-emptive 404(c) veto under the CWA. The EPA moved for summary judgment claiming that its search for and disclosure of documents was adequate. The Pebble Partnership opposed the government’s motion, pointing out several deficiencies in the EPA’s search parameters and the agency’s overly broad assertion of the deliberative process privilege to withhold documents. On August 24, 2015, the US federal court judge granted in part and deferred in part the EPA’s motion for summary judgement on the FOIA litigation. The court accepted the EPA’s position that it had made an adequate search for documents but left the matter open should the EPA not meet its obligations in the FACA litigation or if additional documents surface. Additionally, the judge ordered EPA to produce a sample of 183 partially or fully withheld documents so that it could conduct an in-camera review of the sample and test the merits of EPA’s withholdings under the deliberative process privilege. Before producing this sample to the Court, EPA chose to voluntarily release 115 documents (or 63% of the sample ordered by the Court), relinquishing its claim of privilege as to these documents.

In briefings before the Court, the Pebble Partnership argued that the voluntary release of 63% of the agency’s same documents conclusively demonstrated that the EPA had been over broad in its assertion of the deliberative process privilege, particularly because the content of the voluntarily released documents was not in fact deliberative. The Court agreed, finding that EPA “improperly withheld documents in full,” and that “many of the documents that defendant released should have been released to begin with because the portions that defendant released were not deliberative.” It then ordered the EPA to review an additional 65 documents. Of these 65 documents, the EPA voluntarily released 55 documents in whole or in part (or 85% of the documents). Given the EPA’s high rate of release, the Pebble Partnership submitted a brief to the Court arguing that the EPA should be forced to review the remaining documents being withheld and arguing that judgment should not be granted to the agency at this time. The Court agreed, concluding that it had “no confidence that [EPA] has properly withheld documents, either in full or in part, pursuant to the deliberative process privilege.” The Court reiterated its earlier finding that EPA had been withholding documents that “should never have been withheld to begin with.” As a result, the Court ordered the Agency to re-evaluate all remaining documents EPA is withholding in response to the Pebble Partnership’s January 2014 FOIA request and to submit these documents for in-camera review. After this review, the Court issued an order resolving Pebble’s challenges to the remaining withholdings and forcing EPA, yet again, to produce additional documents that the agency had been improperly withholding for over two years.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 49

 

Office of the EPA Inspector General (“OIG”) review

Counsel for Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Partnership submitted numerous letters to the independent OIG since January 2014, raising concerns of apprehension of bias, process irregularities and undue influence by environmental organizations in the EPA’s preparation of the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment. In response to Congressional and other requests, on May 2, 2014, the OIG announced that it would investigate the EPA’s conduct in preparing An Assessment of Potential Mining Impacts on Salmon Ecosystems of Bristol Bay, Alaska, “to determine whether the EPA adhered to laws, regulations, policies and procedures in developing its assessment of potential mining impacts in Bristol Bay, Alaska.” On January 13, 2016, the OIG published its report (the “OIG Report”). While acknowledging significant “scope limitations” in its review and subsequent OIG Report, the OIG concluded that: “we found no evidence of bias in how the EPA conducted its assessment of the Bristol Bay watershed, or that the EPA pre-determined the assessment outcome,” but that an EPA Region 10 employee may have been guilty of “a possible misuse of position.”

Several other investigations of EPA conduct at Pebble contradict the OIG Report. The US Congress’ House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found “that EPA employees had inappropriate contact with outside groups and failed to conduct an impartial, fact-based review of the proposed Pebble mine.” In addition, a report by former United States Senator and Defense Secretary William S. Cohen and his firm (further described below), said their investigation “raise(s) serious concerns as to whether EPA orchestrated the process to reach a pre-determined outcome; had inappropriately close relationships with anti-mine advocates; and was candid about its decision-making process.”

The findings of the OIG Report did not materially affect the Pebble Partnership’s strategy for addressing the EPA’s CWA Section 404(c) regulatory action. The Company remained confident that the Pebble Project would ultimately enter federal and state permitting unencumbered by any extraordinary development restrictions, a belief borne out by the joint settlement agreement reached with EPA in May 2017.

Cohen report

In March 2015, William Cohen and his firm, The Cohen Group, assisted by the law firm DLA Piper, was retained by the Pebble Partnership to conduct an independent review of whether the EPA acted fairly in connection with its evaluation of potential mining in the Bristol Bay watershed. Secretary Cohen was requested to evaluate the fairness of EPA’s actions and decisions in this matter based upon a thorough assessment of the facts and relying on his experience as a senior government official, as well as his 24 years as a member of the US Senate and House of Representatives.

A team of independent investigators employed by The Cohen Group and DLA Piper reviewed thousands of documents secured through FOIA requests and interviewed approximately 60 individuals involved with the EPA or its review of the Pebble Project. On October 6, 2015, Mr. Cohen released his report entitled Report of an Independent Review of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Actions in Connection with its Evaluation of Potential Mining in Alaska’s Bristol Bay Watershed. The report stated the conclusion of Mr. Cohen that he did not believe the EPA used the “fairest and most appropriate process” in its proposed pre-emptive regulatory action under the CWA.

Mr. Cohen urged policymakers to require that the permitting process under NEPA and the regulations developed by the Council on Environmental Quality (the “Permit/NEPA Process”) be followed. Mr. Cohen commented that the Permit/NEPA Process is more comprehensive than the pre-emptive Section 404(c) action employed by the EPA and he could find no valid reason why that process was not used.

The Cohen report also raised a number of concerns about the EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment study and the CWA Section 404(c) regulatory action, including possible prejudice and pre-determination of outcomes by the EPA, inappropriately close relationships between certain EPA officials and anti-mine advocates, EPA’s candor with respect to certain actions it took, lack of consistency between the BBWA and the proposed determination, and lack of cooperation by EPA personnel with respect to Congressional queries and FOIA requests.

Northern Dynasty does not consider the Cohen report to constitute an “expert’s” report but rather considers it to constitute an informed view of the Company’s treatment by the EPA expressed by a person familiar with governmental due process goals. Mr. Cohen also appeared before a Congressional committee (House Committee on Science, Space and Technology) with respect to the findings in his report.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 50

 

US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology

On February 22, 2017, the US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Chairman, Lamar Smith, sent a letter to the EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, recommending that “the incoming Administration rescind the EPA’s proposed determination to use Section 404(c) in a pre-emptive fashion for the Pebble Mine in Bristol Bay, Alaska. This simple action would allow a return to the long-established CWA permitting process and stop attempts by the EPA to improperly expand its authority. Moreover, it would create regulatory certainty for future development projects that will create jobs and contribute to the American economy.”

On March 7, 2018, Chairman of the US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Lamar Smith, Chairman of the US House Natural Resources Committee, Rob Bishop, and Chairman of the US Congressional Western Caucus, Paul Grossman, sent a joint letter to the EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt expressing “serious concerns” about the federal agency’s January 26, 2018 announcement that it had suspended the process to withdraw the CWA 404(c) proposed determination initiated at the Pebble Project in July 2014 The joint letter recommended that “EPA clearly states that in the event that the scoping process undertaken by the Corps addresses all of the major issues identified in the 2014 proposed determination, that the EPA will withdraw the determination.” The letter further states that “Using the Corps EIS process to inform the decision on the proposed determination will allow a return to the long-established Clean Water Act permitting process, enforcing the principles of due process and rule of law.”

Other Matters

On February 14, 2017, short seller investment firm Kerrisdale Capital Management LLC published a negative piece (the “Kerrisdale Report”) regarding the Pebble Project. Three putative shareholder class actions were filed against the Company and certain of its current officers and directors in US federal courts, specifically the Central District of California (Los Angeles) and the Southern District of New York (New York City). The cases are captioned: Diaz v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01241 (C.D. Cal.); Kirwin v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01238 (S.D.N.Y.); and Schubert v. Northern Dynasty Minerals, Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:17-CV-02437 (S.D.N.Y.). The complaints appear to rely on the claims made in the Kerrisdale Report and allege damages to a class of investors who purchased shares of the Company prior to the publication of the Kerrisdale Report and allege liability for losses pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 thereunder, as well as control person liability against the individual defendants pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.

The plaintiffs in both the Kirwin and Schubert actions voluntarily dismissed their claims without prejudice. The plaintiffs in the Diaz action continue to litigate and recently filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and the plaintiffs have filed a motion opposing the dismissal to which the Company replied in March 2018. The Company believes that the allegations in the remaining complaint are without merit, and it intends to defend itself vigorously in the Diaz action.

Risk Factors

The outcomes of the legal proceedings described above cannot be predicted and resolution of these legal proceedings will likely involve significant expense to the Company. In addition, adverse outcomes in these legal proceedings may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, future prospects and financial condition. Investors should refer to the risk factors identified above under Item 5 – Description of Business – Risk Factors, starting on page 31, for a discussion of risks relating to the legal proceedings described above.

Regulatory Actions

There have been no:

(a) penalties or sanctions imposed against the Company by a court relating to securities legislation or by a securities regulatory authority during the most recently completed financial year,

or

(b) other material penalties or sanctions imposed by a court or regulatory body against the Company, or

(c) settlement agreements the Company entered into before a court relating to securities legislation or with a securities regulatory authority during the most recently completed financial year.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 51

 

Item 13. Interest of Management and Others in Material Transactions

None of the directors or senior officers of the Company, nor any person who has held such a position since the beginning of the last completed financial year end of the Company, nor any associate or affiliate of the foregoing persons, has any substantial or material interest, direct or indirect, by way of beneficial ownership of securities or otherwise, in any material transactions of the Company other than as set out herein.

Certain directors of a private company, HDSI, a wholly owned subsidiary of HDI (see Item 10) are also directors of the Company. Pursuant to a management services agreement with HDSI, HDSI provides geological, corporate development, administrative and management services to, and incurs third party costs on behalf of, the Company and its subsidiaries at annually set rates. During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company paid HDSI approximately $5.2 million (2016 – $3.6 million) for services rendered by HDSI and reimbursed HDSI approximately $0.7 million (2016 – $0.5 million) for third party costs incurred on the Company’s behalf. Certain members of the Company’s senior management including the Company’s CFO are employed by HDSI rather than by Northern Dynasty directly.

Item 14. Transfer Agent and Registrar

The Company’s registrar and transfer agent is Computershare Trust Company of Canada, located in Vancouver, BC.

Item 15. Material Contracts

Northern Dynasty’s only material contract as of March 28, 2017 is:

• Corporate Services Agreement between Northern Dynasty and Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. dated July 2, 2010.

Other agreements are in the normal course of business.

Item 16. Interests of Experts

David Gaunt, P.Geo., James Lang, P.Geo., Eric Titley, P.Geo., and Stephen Hodgson, P.Eng., of Hunter Dickinson Services Inc., and Ting Lu, P.Eng., of Tetra Tech Canada Inc., are persons:

• who are named as in a report described in a filing, or referred to in a filing, made under National Instrument 51-102 by the Company during, or relating to, the Company’s most recently completed financial year; and

• whose profession or business gives authority to the report made by each of them.

Messrs. Gaunt, Lang, Titley and Hodgson are employees of HDSI and hold interests in the common shares of the Company, directly or indirectly, or through share purchase options, representing less than 1% of the Company’s outstanding share capital. Ms. Lu holds no interest in the Company.

Deloitte LLP have prepared the Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on the consolidated financial statements of the Company as at and for the years ended December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016. Deloitte LLP is independent within the meaning of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Chartered Professional Accountants of British Columbia.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 52

 

Item 17. Additional Information

Additional information, including directors’ and officers’ remuneration, indebtedness of officers, executive stock options and interests of management and others in material transactions, where applicable, is contained in annual financial statements, management’s discussion and analysis, proxy circulars and interim financial statements of the Company, available under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and from the SEC’s Electronic Document Gathering and Retrieval System (“EDGAR”) at www.sec.gov.

The following documents can be obtained upon request from Northern Dynasty’s Shareholder Communication Department by calling (604) 684-6365:

• this AIF, together with any document incorporated herein by reference;

• interim consolidated financial statements filed with Securities Commissions subsequent to the audited consolidated financial statements for the Company’s most recently completed financial year; and

• the Proxy Circular for the annual general meeting of the Company when available.

The Company may require the payment of a reasonable charge from persons, other than security holders of the Company, requesting copies of these documents.

Item 18. Disclosure for Companies not Sending Information Circulars

Not applicable.

Item 19. Audit and Risk Committee, Auditor Fees, Exemptions, Code of Ethics

Audit and Risk Committee

Audit and Risk Committee (“Audit Committee”) Charter

The Audit and Risk Committee has adopted a charter that sets out its mandate and responsibilities, and is attached to this AIF as Appendix A.

Composition of the Audit Committee

The Audit and Risk Committee currently consists of Christian Milau, Ken Pickering and Steven Decker. Mr. Milau is the Chairman of the Audit and Risk Committee. The Committee reviews all financial statements of the Company prior to their publication, reviews audits performed, considers the adequacy of audit procedures, recommends the appointment of independent auditors, reviews and approves the professional services to be rendered by them and reviews fees for audit services. The Audit and Risk Committee Charter has set criteria for membership which all members of the Audit and Risk Committee are required to meet consistent with National Instrument 52-110 and other applicable regulatory requirements. The Audit and Risk Committee, as needed, meets separately (without management present) with the Company’s auditors to discuss the various aspects of the Company’s financial statements and the independent audit.

Each Audit and Risk Committee member is an independent director and is financially literate. Mr. Decker is a Chartered Financial Analyst with an MBA, Finance. Mr. Pickering has been a member on other audit committees of publicly listed companies. Mr. Milau, the Audit and Risk Committee Chairman is a Chartered Professional Accountant and is a financial expert.

Relevant Education and Experience

As a result of their education and experience, each member of the Audit and Risk Committee has familiarity with, an understanding of, or experience in:

• the accounting principles used by the Company to prepare its financial statements, and the ability to assess the general application of those principles in connection with estimates, accruals and reserves;

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 53

 

• reviewing or evaluating financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the Company’s financial statements, and

• an understanding of internal controls and procedures for financial reporting.

See disclosure regarding biographical information in Item 10.

Reliance On Certain Exemptions Available in NI 52-110

The Company’s auditor, Deloitte LLP, has not provided any material non-audit services during the most recently completed fiscal year.

Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures

The Company has procedures for the review and pre-approval of any services performed by its auditor. The procedures require that all proposed engagements of its auditor for audit and non-audit services be submitted to the Audit and Risk Committee for approval prior to the beginning of any such services. The Audit and Risk Committee considers such requests and, if acceptable to a majority of the Audit and Risk Committee members, pre-approves such audit and non-audit services by a resolution authorizing management to engage the Company’s auditor for such audit and non-audit services, with set maximum dollar amounts for each itemized service. During such deliberations, the Audit and Risk Committee assesses, among other factors, whether the services requested would be considered “prohibited services” as contemplated by the regulations of the SEC, and whether the services requested and the fees related to such services could impair the independence of the auditors.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

The Audit and Risk Committee has reviewed the nature and amount of the audit and non-audit services provided by Deloitte LLP to the Company to ensure auditor independence. Fees incurred with Deloitte LLP for audit and non-audit services in the last two fiscal years are outlined in the following table.

Nature of Services		Year ended December 31  2017	Year ended December 31  2016
Audit Fees	the aggregate fees billed by our independent auditor for the audit of our annual consolidated financial statements, reviews of interim consolidated financial statements and attestation services that are provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.	$  107,000	$   122,000
Audit-Related Fees	include services that are traditionally performed by the auditor.  These audit-related services include employee benefit audits, due diligence assistance, accounting consultations on proposed transactions, internal control reviews and audit or attest services not required by legislation or regulation.	–	182,000
Tax Fees	include fees for all tax services other than those included in “Audit Fees” and “Audit-Related Fees”.  This category includes fees for tax compliance, tax planning and tax advice.  Tax planning and tax advice includes assistance with tax audits and appeals, tax advice related to mergers and acquisitions, and requests for rulings or technical advice from tax authorities.	10,000	–
All Other Fees	include all other non-audit services.	–	–
Total		$  117,000	$  304,000

From time to time, management of the Company recommends to and requests approval from the Audit and Risk Committee for audit and non-audit services to be provided by the Company’s auditors. The Audit and Risk Committee routinely considers such requests at committee meetings, and if acceptable to a majority of the audit committee members, pre-approves such audit and non-audit services by a resolution authorizing management to engage the Company’s auditors for such non-audit services, with set maximum dollar amounts for each itemized service. During such deliberations, the Audit and Risk Committee assesses, among other factors, whether the non-audit services requested would be considered “prohibited services” as contemplated by the SEC, and whether the non-audit services requested and the fees related to such services could impair the independence of the auditors.

Code of Ethics

The Company has adopted a code of ethics that applies to all directors, officers and employees of the Company. A copy of the Code of Ethics, which is included as part of the Company’s Governance Policies and Procedures Manual is available for download from the Company’s website at www.northerndynastyminerals.com and under the Company’s profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 54

 

Appendix A - Audit and Risk Committee Charter

1. Purpose: Responsibilities and Authority

The Audit and Risk Committee (the “Audit Committee” or “Committee”) shall carry out its responsibilities under applicable laws, regulations and stock exchange requirements with respect to the employment, compensation and oversight of the Company’s independent auditor, and other matters under the authority of the Committee. The Committee also shall assist the Board of Directors in carrying out its oversight responsibilities relating to the Company’s financial, accounting and reporting processes, the Company’s system of internal accounting and financial controls, the Company’s compliance with related legal and regulatory requirements, and the fairness of transactions between the Company and related parties. In furtherance of this purpose, the Committee shall have the following responsibilities and authority:

(a) Relationship with Independent Auditor.

(i)	Subject to the law of British Columbia as to the role of the Shareholders in the appointment of independent auditors, the Committee shall have the sole authority to appoint or replace the independent auditor.
(ii)	The Committee shall be directly responsible for the compensation and oversight of the work of the independent auditor (including resolution of disagreements between management and the independent auditor regarding financial reporting) for the purpose of preparing or issuing an audit report or related work.
(iii)	The independent auditor shall report directly to the Committee.
(iv)	The Committee shall approve in advance all audit and permitted non-audit services with the independent auditor, including the terms of the engagements and the fees payable; provided that the Committee Chair may approve services to be performed by the independent auditors and the fee therefor between Committee meetings if the amount of the fee does not exceed $50,000, provided that any such approval shall be reported to the Committee at the next meeting thereof. The Committee may delegate to a subcommittee the authority to grant pre-approvals of audit and permitted non-audit services, provided that the decision of any such subcommittee shall be presented to the full Committee at its next scheduled meeting.
(v)	At least annually, the Committee shall review and evaluate the experience and qualifications of the lead partner and senior members of the independent auditor team.
(vi)	At least annually, the Committee shall obtain and review a report from the independent auditor regarding:

(A)       the independent auditor’s internal quality-control procedures;

(B) any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the auditor, or by any inquiry or investigation by governmental or professional authorities within the preceding five years respecting one or more independent audits carried out by the firm;

(C)       any steps taken to deal with any such issues; and

(D)       all relationships between the independent auditor and the Company.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 55

 

(vii) At least annually, the Committee shall evaluate the qualifications, performance and independence of the independent auditor, including considering whether the auditor’s quality controls are adequate and the provision of permitted non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the auditor’s independence.

(viii) The Committee shall ensure the rotation of the lead (or coordinating) audit partner having primary responsibility for the audit, the concurring partner responsible for reviewing the audit, and other audit partners as required by law.

(ix) The Committee shall consider whether, in order to assure continuing auditor independence, it is appropriate to adopt a policy of rotating the independent auditing firm on a regular basis.

(x) The Committee shall recommend to the Board policies for the Company’s hiring of employees or former employees of the independent auditor who were engaged on the Company’s account or participated in any capacity in the audit of the Company.

(xi) The Committee shall oversee the implementation by management of appropriate information technology systems for the Company, including as required for proper financial reporting and compliance.

(b)       Financial Statement and Disclosure Review.

(i) The Committee shall review and discuss with management and the independent auditor the annual audited financial statements, including disclosures made in management’s discussion and analysis, and recommend to the Board whether the audited financial statements should be filed with applicable securities regulatory authorities and included in the Company’s annual reports.

(ii) The Committee shall review and discuss with management (and, to the extent the Committee deems it necessary or appropriate, the independent auditor) the Company’s quarterly financial statements, including disclosures made in management’s discussion and analysis, and recommend to the Board whether such financial statements should be filed with applicable securities regulatory authorities.

(iii) The Committee shall review and discuss with management and the independent auditor significant financial reporting issues and judgments made in connection with the preparation of the Company’s financial statements, including the independent auditor’s assessment of the quality of the Company’s accounting principles, any significant changes in the Company’s selection or application of accounting principles, any major issues as to the adequacy of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting, and any special steps adopted in light of material control deficiencies.

(iv) At least annually and prior to the publication of annual audited financial statements, the Committee shall review and discuss with management and the independent auditor a report from the independent auditor on:

(A)       all critical accounting policies and practices used by the Company;

(B) all alternative accounting treatments of financial information that have been discussed with management since the prior report, ramifications of the use of such alternative disclosures and treatments, the treatment preferred by the independent auditor, and an explanation of why the independent auditor’s preferred method was not adopted; and.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 56

 

(C) other material written communications between the independent auditor and management since the prior report, such as any management letter or schedule of unadjusted differences, the development, selection and disclosure of critical accounting estimates, and analyses of the effect of alternative assumptions, estimates or GAAP methods on the Company’s financial statements.

(v) Prior to their filing or issuance, the Committee shall review the Company’s Annual Information Form/Annual Report to the SEC, quarterly and annual earnings press releases, and other financial press releases, including the use of “pro forma” or “adjusted” non-GAAP information.

(vi) The Committee shall review and discuss with management the financial information and earnings guidance provided to analysts and rating agencies. Such discussion may be specific or it may be in general regarding the types of information to be disclosed and the types of presentations to be made.

(c) Conduct of the Annual Audit.

The Committee shall oversee the annual audit, and in the course of such oversight the Committee shall have the following responsibilities and authority:

(i) The Committee shall meet with the independent auditor prior to the audit to discuss the planning and conduct of the annual audit, and shall meet with the independent auditor as may be necessary or appropriate in connection with the audit.

(ii) The Committee shall ascertain that the independent auditor is registered and in good standing with the Canadian Public Accountability Board and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) and that the independent auditor satisfies all applicable Canadian independence standards (Canadian Auditing Standard 200), PCAOB Rule 3526 and SEC Regulation S-X, Section 2-01. The Committee shall obtain from the auditor a written description of all relationships between the auditor and the Company and persons in a financial reporting oversight role at the Company as per PCAOB Rule 3526, that may reasonably be thought to bear on independence.

(iii) The Committee shall discuss with the independent auditor the matters required to be discussed by PCAOB Auditing Standard No. 16 and Canadian Auditing Standard 260 relating to the conduct of the audit.

(iv) The Committee shall obtain from the independent auditor assurance that the audit was conducted in a manner consistent with Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that, in the course of conducting the audit, the independent auditor has not become aware of information indicating that an illegal act has or may have occurred or, if such an act may have occurred, that the independent auditor has taken all action required by Section 10A(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

(v) The Committee shall make such inquiries to the management and the independent auditor as the Committee members deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy themselves regarding the efficacy of the Company’s financial and internal controls and procedures and the auditing process.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 57

 

(d)       Compliance and Oversight.

(i) The Committee shall meet periodically with management and the independent auditor in separate executive sessions. The Committee may also, to the extent it deems necessary or appropriate, meet with the Company’s investment bankers and financial analysts who follow the Company.

(ii) The Committee shall discuss with management and the independent auditor the effect of regulatory and accounting initiatives as well as off-balance sheet structures on the Company’s financial statements.

(iii) The Committee shall discuss with management the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps management has taken to monitor and control such exposures, including the Company’s risk assessment and risk management policies, and regularly review the top risks identified by management and the policies and practices adopted by the Company to mitigate those risks.

(iv) At least annually and prior to the filing of the AIF/Annual Report to the SEC, the Committee shall review with management and the independent auditor the disclosure controls and procedures and confirm that the Company (with CEO and CFO participation) has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the controls within 90 days prior to the date of filing of the AIF/Annual Report to the SEC. The Committee also shall review with management and the independent auditor any deficiencies in the design and operation of internal controls and significant deficiencies or material weaknesses therein and any fraud involving management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company’s internal controls. As a part of that review, the Committee shall review the process followed in preparing and verifying the accuracy of the required CEO and CFO annual certifications.

(v) At least annually and prior to the filing of the AIF/Annual Report to the SEC, the Committee shall review with management and the independent auditor management’s internal control report and assessment of the internal controls and procedures, and the independent auditor’s report on and assessment of the internal controls and procedures. In connection with its review of interim and annual financial statements and related management’s discussion and analysis, the Committee shall confirm with management that the Company (with CEO and CFO participation) has taken all actions required in connection with the certifications required by National Instrument NI 52-109, Certification of Disclosure in Issuers’ Annual and Interim Filings.

(vi) The Committee shall establish procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by the Company regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, and the confidential, anonymous submission by employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.

(vii) The Committee shall discuss with management and the independent auditor any correspondence with regulators or governmental agencies and any employee complaints or reports which raise material issues regarding the Company’s financial statements or accounting policies.

(viii) At least annually, the Committee shall meet with the Company’s legal counsel and discuss any legal matters that may have a material impact on the financial statements or the Company’s compliance policies.

(ix) The Committee shall oversee the preparation of reports relating to the Audit Committee required under applicable laws, regulations and stock exchange requirements.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 58

 

(x) The Committee shall exercise oversight with respect to anti-fraud programs and controls

(e)       Related Party Transactions.

(i) The Committee shall review for fairness to the Company proposed transactions, contracts and other arrangements between the Company and its subsidiaries and any related party or affiliate, and make recommendations to the Board whether any such transactions, contracts and other arrangements should be approved or continued. The foregoing shall not include any compensation payable pursuant to any plan, program, contract or arrangement subject to the authority of the Company’s Compensation Committee.

(ii) As used herein the term “related party” means any officer or director of the Company or any subsidiary, or any shareholder holding a greater than 10% direct or indirect financial or voting interest in the Company, and the term “affiliate” means any person, whether acting alone or in concert with others, that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with another person. “Related party” includes Hunter Dickinson Services Inc., its principals, and their affiliates.

(f)       Additional duties. The Committee shall perform the following additional duties:

(i) The Committee shall review and recommend dividend policies.

(ii) The Committee shall oversee the Company’s insurance program..

(iii) The Committee shall review the appointment of senior financial personnel and make recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the appointment of the Chief Financial Officer.

(iv) The Committee shall recommend to the Nominating and Governance Committee the qualifications and criteria for membership on the Committee.

(v) The Committee shall review and discuss with management the requirement for annual public disclosure pursuant to the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act and shall be responsible for approving such disclosures.

2. Structure and Membership

(a) Number and qualification.

The Committee shall consist of three persons unless the Board should from time to time otherwise determine. All members of the Committee shall meet the experience and financial literacy requirements of National Instrument NI 52-110 and the rules of the Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE American. At least one member of the Committee shall be a “financial expert” as defined in Item 407 of SEC Regulation S-K.

(b) Selection and Removal.

Members of the Committee shall be appointed by the Board, upon the recommendation of the Nominating and Governance Committee. The Board may remove members of the Committee at any time with or without cause.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 59

 

(c) Independence.

All of the members of the Committee shall be “independent” as required for audit committees by National Instrument NI 52-110, the rules of the Toronto Stock Exchange and the NYSE American, and SEC Rule 10A-3.

(d) Chair.

Unless the Board elects a Chair of the Committee, the Committee shall elect a Chair by majority vote.

(e)          Compensation.

The compensation of the Committee shall be as determined by the Board.

(f) Term.

Members of the Committee shall be appointed for one-year terms. Each member shall serve until his or her replacement is appointed, or until he or she resigns or is removed from the Board or the Committee.

3. Procedures and Administration

(a) Meetings.

The Committee shall meet as often as it deems necessary in order to perform its responsibilities, but not less than quarterly. The Committee shall keep minutes of its meetings and any other records as it deems appropriate.

(b) Subcommittees.

The Committee may form and delegate authority to one or more subcommittees, consisting of at least one member, as it deems appropriate from time to time under the circumstances.

(c) Reports to the Board.

The Committee shall regularly report to the Board with respect to such matters as are relevant to the Committee’s discharge of its responsibilities, and shall report in writing on request of the Chair of the Board.

(d) Charter.

The Committee shall, at least annually, review and reassess the adequacy of this Charter and recommend any proposed changes to the Board for approval.

(e) Independent Advisors.

The Committee shall have the authority to engage such independent legal and other advisors as it deems necessary or appropriate to carry out its responsibilities. Such independent advisors may be regular advisors to the Company. The Committee is empowered, without further action by the Board, to cause the Company to pay appropriate compensation to advisors engaged by the Committee.

(f) Investigations.

The Committee shall have the authority to conduct or authorize investigations into any matters within the scope of its responsibilities as it deems appropriate, including the authority to request any Officer or other person to meet with the Committee and to access all Company records.

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 60

 

(g)       Annual Self-Evaluation.

The Committee shall evaluate its own performance at least annually.

4. Additional Powers

The Committee shall have such other duties as may be delegated from time to time by the Board of Directors.

5. Limitation of Committee’s Role

While the Committee has the responsibilities and powers set forth in this Charter, it is not the duty of the Committee to plan or conduct audits or to determine that the Company’s financial statements and disclosures are complete and accurate and are in accordance with GAAP and applicable rules and regulations. These are the responsibilities of management and the independent auditor.

6. Committee Member Independence, Financial Literacy and Financial Expert Requirements

A.       Independence

(a)        See Appendix 2 of the Company’s Corporate Governance Overview and Guidelines.

B.       Financial Literacy and Financial Expert Requirements

NI 52-110

Section 3.1(4) states that each audit committee member must be financially literate.

Section 1.6 defines the meaning of financial literacy as follows:

“For the purposes of this Instrument, an individual is financially literate if he or she has the ability to read and understand a set of financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of the issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the issuer’s financial statements.”

NYSE AMERICAN Section 803(B)(2)(a)(iii)

Each issuer must have an Audit Committee of at least three members, each of whom:

“is able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, including a company’s balance sheet, income statement, and cash flow statement. Additionally, each issuer must certify that it has, and will continue to have, at least one member of the audit committee who is financially sophisticated, in that he or she has past employment experience in finance or accounting, requisite professional certification in accounting, or any other comparable experience or background which results in the individual’s financial sophistication, including but not limited to being or having been a chief executive officer, chief financial officer, other senior officer with financial oversight responsibilities. A director who qualifies as an audit committee financial expert under Item 407(d)(5)(ii) of Regulation S-K is presumed to qualify as financially sophisticated.”

ITEM 407(d)(5)(ii) 0F REGULATION S-K, DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL EXPERT

For purposes of this Item, an audit committee financial expert means a person who has the following attributes:

(A) An understanding of generally accepted accounting principles and financial statements;

(B) The ability to assess the general application of such principles in connection with the accounting for estimates, accruals and reserves;

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 61

 

(C) Experience preparing, auditing, analyzing or evaluating financial statements that present a breadth and level of complexity of accounting issues that are generally comparable to the breadth and complexity of issues that can reasonably be expected to be raised by the registrant’s financial statements, or experience actively supervising one or more persons engaged in such activities;

(D) An understanding of internal control over financial reporting; and

(E) An understanding of audit committee functions.

A person shall have acquired such attributes through:

(A) Education and experience as a principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, public accountant or auditor or experience in one or more positions that involve the performance of similar functions;

(B) Experience actively supervising a principal financial officer, principal accounting officer, controller, public accountant, auditor or person performing similar functions;

(C) Experience overseeing or assessing the performance of companies or public accountants with respect to the preparation, auditing or evaluation of financial statements; or

2017 Annual Information Form P a g e | 62

EX-99.8

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No 333-209921 on Form F3 and to the use of our report dated March 29, 2018 relating to the consolidated financial statements of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. and subsidiaries (which report expresses an unmodified/unqualified opinion and includes an emphasis of matter paragraph relating to going concern uncertainty) appearing in this Annual Report on Form 40-F of Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2017.

/s/ Deloitte LLP

Chartered Professional Accountants

Vancouver, Canada

March 29, 2018

EX-99.9

CONSENT OF J. DAVID GAUNT

To:	United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Re:	Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 40-F Consent of Expert

This consent is provided in connection with the Company’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2017 to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things, the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”), and the Company’s Management Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”).

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical report (the “Technical Report”):

● 2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA, effective date December 22, 2017

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof, in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Company’s registration statement on Form F-3, as amended (SEC File No. 333-209921) (the “Registration Statement”) and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Registration Statement.

Dated the 29^th day of March, 2018.

Yours truly,

/J. David Gaunt/

J. David Gaunt, PGeo.

EX-99.10

CONSENT OF JAMES LANG

To:	United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Re:	Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 40-F Consent of Expert

This consent is provided in connection with the Company’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2017 to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things, the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”), and the Company’s Management Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”).

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical report (the “Technical Report”):

● 2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA, effective date December 22, 2017

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof, in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Company’s registration statement on Form F-3, as amended (SEC File No. 333-209921) (the “Registration Statement”) and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Registration Statement.

Dated the 29^th day of March, 2018.

Yours truly,

/James Lang/

James Lang, PGeo.

EX-99.11

CONSENT OF ERIC TITLEY

To:	United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Re:	Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 40-F Consent of Expert

This consent is provided in connection with the Company’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2017 to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things, the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”), and the Company’s Management Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”).

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical report (the “Technical Report”):

● 2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA, effective date December 22, 2017

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof, in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Company’s registration statement on Form F-3, as amended (SEC File No. 333-209921) (the “Registration Statement”) and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Registration Statement.

Dated the 29^th day of March, 2018.

Yours truly,

/Eric Titley/

Eric Titley, PGeo.

EX-99.12

CONSENT OF TING LU

To:	United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Re:	Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 40-F Consent of Expert

This consent is provided in connection with the Company’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2017 to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things, the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”), and the Company’s Management Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”).

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical report (the “Technical Report”):

● 2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA, effective date December 22, 2017

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof, in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Company’s registration statement on Form F-3, as amended (SEC File No. 333-209921) (the “Registration Statement”) and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Registration Statement.

Dated the 29^th day of March, 2018.

Yours truly,

/Ting Lu/

Ting Lu, P.Eng.

Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

EX-99.13

CONSENT OF STEPHEN HODGSON

To:	United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Re:	Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) Annual Report on Form 40-F Consent of Expert

This consent is provided in connection with the Company’s annual report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2017 to be filed by the Company with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and any amendments thereto (the “Annual Report”). The Annual Report incorporates by reference, among other things, the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “AIF”), and the Company’s Management Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2017 (the “MD&A”).

I hereby consent to the use of my name in connection with reference to my involvement in the preparation of the following technical report (the “Technical Report”):

● 2018 Technical Report on the Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska, USA, effective date December 22, 2017

and to references to the Technical Report, or portions thereof, in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Company’s registration statement on Form F-3, as amended (SEC File No. 333-209921) (the “Registration Statement”) and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of the information derived from the Technical Report in the Annual Report, the AIF, the MD&A and the Registration Statement.

Dated the 29^th day of March, 2018.

Yours truly,

/Stephen Hodgson/

Stephen Hodgson, PEng.

XML

Document and Entity Information - shares	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Mar. 28, 2018
Document And Entity Information
Entity Registrant Name	NORTHERN DYNASTY MINERALS LTD
Entity Central Index Key	0001164771
Document Type	40-F
Document Period End Date	Dec. 31, 2017
Amendment Flag	false
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity's Reporting Status Current	Yes
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		0
Trading Symbol	NDM
Document Fiscal Period Focus	FY
Document Fiscal Year Focus	2017

XML

Consolidated Statements of Financial Position - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Non-current assets
Restricted Cash	$ 757
Mineral property, plant and equipment	133,711	142,472
Total non-current assets	134,468	142,472
Current assets
Amounts receivable and prepaid expenses	994	679
Cash and cash equivalents	67,158	7,196
Total current assets	68,152	7,875
Total Assets	202,620	150,347
Capital and reserves
Share capital	513,304	452,132
Reserves	95,168	102,821
Deficit	(470,971)	(406,106)
Total equity	137,501	148,847
Non-current liabilities
Non-refundable early option price installment	47,149
Trade and other payables	6,650
Total non-current liabilities	53,799
Current liabilities
Payables to related parties	1,052	240
Trade and other payables	10,268	1,260
Total current liabilities	11,320	1,500
Total liabilities	65,119	1,500
Total Equity and Liabilities	202,620	150,347
Commitments (note 12)

XML

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Expenses
Exploration and evaluation expenses	$ 22,594	$ 7,935
General and administrative expenses	9,384	6,729
Legal, accounting and audit	26,358	9,442
Share-based compensation	5,858	2,995
Loss from operating activities	64,194	27,101
Foreign exchange loss (gain)	1,133	(43)
Interest income	(462)	(33)
Amount receivable written off		15
Gain on sale of available-for-sale financial assets		70
Loss on sale of plant and equipment		(23)
Loss before tax	64,865	26,982
Deferred Income tax (recovery) expense
Net loss	64,865	26,982
Items that may be subsequently reclassified to loss
Foreign exchange translation difference	8,299	4,246
Derecognition of available-for-sale financial assets		(105)
Other comprehensive loss	8,299	4,141
Total comprehensive loss	$ 73,164	$ 31,123
Basic and diluted loss per common share	$ 0.22	$ 0.11

XML

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Operating activities
Net loss	$ (64,865)	$ (26,982)
Non-cash or non operating items
Amount receivable written off		15
Depreciation	176	205
Gain on disposal of available-for-sale financial assets		(70)
Gain on sale of surplus site inventory		(11)
Loss on sale of plant and equipment		23
Interest earned on cash	(462)	(33)
Non-current legal fees payable	6,865
Share-based compensation	5,858	2,995
Unrealized exchange loss	511	68
Changes in working capital items
Restricted cash	(796)	453
Amounts receivable and prepaid expenses	(317)	405
Trade and other payables	9,618	(645)
Payables to related parties	393	(437)
Net cash used in operating activities	(43,019)	(24,014)
Investing activities
Acquisition of plant and equipment	(473)
Proceeds from disposal of available-for-sale financial assets		1,754
Proceeds from sale of surplus site inventory		11
Interest received on cash and cash equivalents	414	33
Net cash (used in) from investing activities	(59)	1,798
Financing activities
Net proceeds from prospectus financing		16,030
Net proceeds from private placement		1,967
Net proceeds from bought deal financing	45,887
Cash settlement of equity-settled restricted share units	(1,098)
Witholding taxes paid on equity-settled restricted share units	(30)
Non-refundable early option price installment	48,308
Proceeds from the exercise of share purchase options	1,803	611
Proceeds from the exercise of warrants	9,817	3,363
Net cash from financing activities	104,687	21,971
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents	61,609	(245)
Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash and cash equivalents	(1,647)	(68)
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning balance	7,196	7,509
Cash and cash equivalents - ending balance	$ 67,158	$ 7,196

XML

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	Share Capital [Member]	Equity Settled Share-Based Compensation Reserve [Member]	Foreign Currency Translation Reserve [Member]	Investment Revaluation Reserve [Member]	Share Purchase Warrants [Member]	Deficit [Member]	Total
Balance at Dec. 31, 2015	$ 435,069	$ 56,197	$ 40,479	$ (107)	$ 2,466	$ (379,124)	$ 154,980
Balance, shares at Dec. 31, 2015	221,939,376
Shares issued pursuant to private placement, net of transaction costs	$ 1,264						1,264
Shares issued pursuant to private placement, net of transaction costs, shares	4,444,376
Shares issued pursuant to prospectus financing, net of transaction costs	$ 10,347						10,347
Shares issued pursuant to prospectus financing, net of transaction costs, shares	38,000,000
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan	$ 503						$ 503
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan, shares	548,869						(548,869)
Shares issued upon exercise of options not under option plan	$ 132						$ 132
Shares issued upon exercise of options not under option plan, shares	376,000
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants	$ 3,363						3,363
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants, shares	5,560,940
Warrants issued pursuant to private placement, net of transaction costs					703		703
Warrants issued pursuant to prospectus financing, net of transaction costs					5,683		5,683
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised per plan	266	(266)
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised not under option plan	98				(98)
Fair value and costs allocated to share capital on exercise of warrants	1,090				(1,090)
Cash settlement of equity-settled restricted share units
Share-based compensation		2,995					2,995
Net loss						(26,982)	(26,982)
Other comprehensive (loss) income net of tax			4,246	(105)			(4,141)
Total comprehensive loss							(31,123)
Balance at Dec. 31, 2016	$ 452,132	58,926	36,233	(2)	7,664	(406,106)	148,847
Balance, shares at Dec. 31, 2016	270,869,561
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan	$ 1,756						$ 1,756
Shares issued on exercise of options per option plan, shares	1,277,200						(1,277,200)
Shares issued upon exercise of options not under option plan	$ 47						$ 47
Shares issued upon exercise of options not under option plan, shares	118,800
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants	$ 9,817						9,817
Shares issued upon exercise of warrants, shares	15,710,201
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised per plan	$ 822	(822)
Fair value allocated to shares issued on options exercised not under option plan	44				(44)
Shares issued pursuant to bought deal financing, net of transaction costs	$ 45,887						45,887
Shares issued pursuant to bought deal financing, net of transaction costs, shares	20,240,000
Shares issued pursuant to restricted share unit plan	$ 49	(49)
Shares issued pursuant to restricted share unit plan, shares	22,094
Cash settlement of tax on issue of equity-settled restricted share units		(30)					(30)
Cash settlement of equity-settled restricted share units		(1,098)					(1,098)
Fair value and costs transferred to share capital on exercise of warrants	2,750				(2,750)
Fair value transferred to reserve on expiry of warrants		38			(38)
Share-based compensation		5,439					5,439
Net loss						64,865	(64,865)
Other comprehensive (loss) income net of tax			8,299				(8,299)
Total comprehensive loss							(73,164)
Balance at Dec. 31, 2017	$ 513,304	$ 62,404	$ 27,934	$ (2)	$ 4,832	$ (470,971)	$ 137,501
Balance, shares at Dec. 31, 2017	308,237,856

XML

Nature and Continuance of Operations

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Nature And Continuance Of Operations

Nature and Continuance of Operations

1. NATURE AND CONTINUANCE OF OPERATIONS

Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. (the “Company”) is incorporated under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Canada, and its principal business activity is the exploration of mineral properties. The Company is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) under the symbol “NDM” and on the New York Stock Exchange-MKT (“NYSE-MKT”) under the symbol “NAK”. The Company’s corporate office is located at 1040 West Georgia Street, 15^th floor, Vancouver, British Columbia.

The consolidated financial statements (“Financial Statements”) of the Company as at and for the year ended December 31, 2017, include financial information for the Company and its subsidiaries (note 2(c)) (together referred to as the “Group” and individually as “Group entities”). The Company is the ultimate parent. The Group’s core mineral property interest is the Pebble Copper-Gold-Molybdenum Project (the “Pebble Project”) located in Alaska, United States of America (“USA” or “US”). All US Dollar amounts when presented are expressed in thousands, unless otherwise stated.

The Group is in the process of exploring and developing the Pebble Project and has not yet determined whether the Pebble Project contains mineral reserves that are economically recoverable. The Group’s continuing operations and the underlying value and recoverability of the amounts shown for the Group’s mineral property interests, is entirely dependent upon the existence of economically recoverable mineral reserves; the ability of the Group to obtain financing to complete the exploration and development of the Pebble Project; the Group obtaining the necessary permits to mine; and future profitable production or proceeds from the disposition of the Pebble Project.

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the company raised gross proceeds of US$37,440 ($49,067) through a bought deal financing (note 7(b)), $11,620 from the exercise of share purchase options and warrants (notes 7(c)-(d)) and received an early option price installment of US37,500 ($48,308) (note 3).

As at December 31, 2017, the Group has $67,158 in cash and cash equivalents for its operating requirements. The Group incurred a net loss of $64,865 and $26,982 during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively and had a deficit $470,971 as at December 31, 2017. The Group is required to utilize the non-refundable early price installment funds (note 3) solely for permitting related expenditures at the Pebble Project. The Group has prioritized the allocation of the remaining available financial resources to meet key corporate expenditure requirements in the near term. Additional financing will be required for working capital for the Company as well as to progress any material expenditures at the Pebble Project in 2018 should there be no formal agreement entered into (note 3). There can be no assurances that the Group will be successful in obtaining additional financing. If the Group is unable to raise the necessary capital resources and generate sufficient cash flows to meet obligations as they come due, the Group may, at some point, consider reducing or curtailing its operations. As such there is material uncertainty that raises substantial doubt about the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern.

From 2014-to May 2017, the Group was focused on a multi-dimensional strategy which included legal and other initiatives designed to ward off a pre-emptive regulatory action by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). On May 12, 2017, the Group announced that the Pebble Limited Partnership (the “Pebble Partnership”) and the EPA had reached a joint settlement agreement over the federal agency’s pre-emptive regulatory action. As a result of the joint settlement, the Group through the Pebble Partnership, filed documentation for a CWA 404 permit with the US Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) on December 22, 2017, thereby initiating federal and state permitting for the Pebble Project under the National Environmental Protection Act (“NEPA”) which documentation was accepted as complete by the USACE in January 2018.

XML

Significant Accounting Policies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Significant Accounting Policies

Significant Accounting Policies

2.	SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
(a)	Statement of Compliance

These Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) and interpretations issued by the IFRS Interpretations Committee (“IFRIC”s) that are effective for the Group’s reporting for the year ended December 31, 2017. These Financial Statements were authorized for issue by the Board of Directors on March 28, 2018.

(b) Basis of Preparation

These Financial Statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis using the accrual basis of accounting, except for cash flow information and for financial instruments classified as available-for-sale, which are stated at their fair value (notes 2(e)). The accounting policies set out below have been applied consistently to all periods presented in these Financial Statements.

(c) Basis of Consolidation

These Financial Statements incorporate the financial statements of the Company, the Company’s subsidiaries, and entities controlled by the Company and its subsidiaries listed below:

Name of Subsidiary	Place of Incorporation	Principal Activity	Ownership
3537137 Canada Inc. 1	Canada	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Pebble Services Inc.	Nevada, USA	Management and services company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Northern Dynasty Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holds 99.9% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership and 100% of Pebble Mines Corp.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Limited Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holding Company and Exploration of the Pebble Project.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Mines Corp.	Delaware, USA	General Partner. Holds 0.1% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble West Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble East Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
U5 Resources Inc. 3	Nevada, USA	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Cannon Point Resources Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
MGL Subco Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Delta Minerals Inc.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of MGL Subco Ltd.	100% (indirect)
Imperial Gold Corporation	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Minerals Inc.	100% (indirect)
Yuma Gold Inc.	Nevada, USA	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Imperial Gold Corporation.	100% (indirect)

1.	Holds 20% interest in the Northern Dynasty Partnership. The Company holds the remaining 80% interest.
2.	Both entities together hold 2,182 claims of the Pebble Project.
3.	Holds 220 claims of the Pebble Project. Subsequent to the reporting date, these claims were sold to Pebble West Claims Corporation.

Control is achieved when the Group is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee. Specifically, the Group controls an investee if, and only if, the Company has power over the investee (i.e. existing rights that give it the current ability to direct the relevant activities of the investee); exposure, or rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee; and the ability to use its power over the investee to affect its returns.

Intra-Group balances and transactions, including any unrealized income and expenses arising from intra-Group transactions, are eliminated in preparing the Financial Statements. Unrealized gains arising from transactions with equity accounted investees are eliminated against the investment to the extent of the Group’s interest in the investee. Unrealized losses are eliminated in the same way as unrealized gains, but only to the extent that there is no evidence of impairment.

(d) Foreign Currencies

The functional currency is the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates and has been determined for each entity within the Group. The functional currency of U5 Resources Inc., Pebble Services Inc., Pebble Mines Corp., the Pebble Partnership and its subsidiaries, and Yuma Gold Inc. is the US dollar and for all other entities within the Group, the functional currency is the Canadian dollar. The functional currency determinations were conducted through an analysis of the factors for consideration identified in IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates.

Transactions in currencies other than the functional currency are recorded at the rates of exchange prevailing on the dates of transactions. At the end of each reporting period, monetary assets and liabilities that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the rates prevailing at that date. Non-monetary assets and liabilities carried at fair value that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at rates prevailing at the date when the fair value was determined. Non-monetary items that are measured in terms of historical cost in a foreign currency are not retranslated.

The results and financial position of entities within the Group which have a functional currency that differs from that of the Group are translated into Canadian dollars as follows: (i) assets and liabilities for each statement of financial position are translated at the closing exchange rate at that date; (ii) income and expenses for each income statement are translated at average exchange rates for the period; and (iii) the resulting exchange differences are included in the foreign currency translation reserve within equity.

 (e) Financial Instruments

Non-derivative financial assets:

The Group has the following non-derivative financial assets: available-for-sale financial assets (of nominal value) and loans and receivables.

Available-for-sale financial assets

Available-for-sale (“AFS”) financial assets are non-derivatives that are either designated as AFS or are not classified as (i) loans and receivables, (ii) held-to-maturity investments or (iii) financial assets at fair value through profit or loss. The Group’s investments in marketable securities are classified as AFS financial assets. Subsequent to initial recognition, they are measured at fair value and changes therein, other than impairment losses, are recognized in other comprehensive income or loss and accumulated in the investment revaluation reserve within equity. When an investment is derecognized, the cumulative gain or loss in the investment revaluation reserve is transferred to profit or loss.

The fair value of AFS monetary assets denominated in a foreign currency is determined in that foreign currency and translated at the spot rate at the end of the reporting period. The change in fair value attributable to translation differences that result from the amortized cost of the monetary asset is recognized within other comprehensive income or loss. The change in fair value of AFS equity investments is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss.

Loans and receivables

Loans and receivables are financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. Such assets are initially recognized at fair value plus any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition, loans and receivables are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method, less any impairment losses.

Loans and receivables consist of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash (note 6), and amounts receivable (note 5).

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash in the statements of financial position are comprised of cash and highly liquid investments having maturity dates of three months or less from the date of purchase, which are readily convertible into known amounts of cash.

The Group’s cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash are invested in business and savings accounts, guaranteed investment certificates and government treasury bills at major financial institutions and are available on demand by the Group when required and, as such, are subject to an insignificant risk of change in value.

Non-derivative financial liabilities:

The Group’s non-derivative financial liabilities comprise of trade and other payables (note 9) and payables to related parties (note 8).

All financial liabilities fall within the classification of other financial liabilities versus financial liabilities through profit or loss, and are recognized initially at fair value net of any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition these financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method.

Impairment of financial assets:

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income or loss are reclassified to profit or loss in the period. Financial assets are assessed for indicators of impairment at the end of each reporting period. Financial assets are impaired when there is objective evidence that, as a result of one or more events that occurred after the initial recognition of the financial assets, the estimated future cash flows of the investments have been impacted. For marketable securities classified as AFS, a significant or prolonged decline in the fair value of the securities below their cost is considered to be objective evidence of impairment.

For all other financial assets, objective evidence of impairment could include:

● significant financial difficulty of the issuer or counterparty; or

● default or delinquency in interest or principal payments; or

● it becoming probable that the borrower will enter bankruptcy or financial re-organization.

For certain categories of financial assets, such as amounts receivable, assets that are assessed not to be impaired individually are subsequently assessed for impairment on a collective basis. The carrying amount of financial assets is reduced by the impairment loss directly for all financial assets with the exception of amounts receivable, where the carrying amount is reduced through the use of an allowance account. When an amount receivable is considered uncollectible, it is written off against the allowance account. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are credited against the allowance account. Changes in the carrying amount of the allowance account are recognized in profit or loss.

With the exception of AFS equity instruments, if, in a subsequent period, the amount of the impairment loss decreases and the decrease can be related objectively to an event occurring after the impairment was recognized, the previously recognized impairment loss is reversed through profit or loss to the extent that the carrying amount of the investment at the date the impairment is reversed does not exceed what the amortized cost would have been had the impairment not been recognized. In respect of AFS equity securities, impairment losses previously recognized through profit or loss are not reversed through profit or loss. Any increase in fair value subsequent to an impairment loss is recognized directly in equity.

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income are reclassified to profit or loss in the reporting period.

Derivative financial assets and liabilities:

The Group has no derivative financial assets or liabilities.

(f) Exploration and Evaluation Expenditure

Exploration and evaluation expenditures include the costs of acquiring licenses, costs associated with exploration and evaluation activity, and the acquisition date fair value of exploration and evaluation assets acquired in a business combination or an asset acquisition. Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expensed as incurred except for expenditures associated with the acquisition of exploration and evaluation assets through a business combination or an asset acquisition. Costs incurred before the Group has obtained the legal rights to explore an area are expensed.

Acquisition costs, including general and administrative costs, are only capitalized to the extent that these costs can be related directly to operational activities in the relevant area of interest where it is considered likely to be recoverable by future exploitation or sale or where the activities have not reached a stage which permits a reasonable assessment of the existence of reserves.

Exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) assets are assessed for impairment only when facts and circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of an E&E asset may exceed its recoverable amount and when the Group has sufficient information to reach a conclusion about technical feasibility and commercial viability.

Industry-specific indicators for an impairment review arise typically when one of the following circumstances applies:

● Substantive expenditure on further exploration and evaluation activities is neither budgeted nor planned;

● title to the asset is compromised;

● adverse changes in the taxation and regulatory environment;

● adverse changes in variations in commodity prices and markets; and

● variations in the exchange rate for the currency of operation.

Once the technical feasibility and commercial viability of the extraction of mineral resources in an area of interest are demonstrable, exploration and evaluation assets attributable to that area of interest are first tested for impairment and then reclassified to mining property and development assets within property, plant and equipment.

Recoverability of the carrying amount of any exploration and evaluation assets is dependent on successful development and commercial exploitation, or alternatively, sale of the respective assets.

(g) Mineral property, plant and equipment

Mineral property, plant and equipment are carried at cost, less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses.

The cost of mineral property, plant and equipment consists of the acquisition costs transferred from E&E assets, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, including costs to further delineate the ore body, development and construction costs, removal of overburden to initially expose the ore body, an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling, removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located and, if applicable, borrowing costs.

Mineral property acquisition and development costs are not currently depreciated as the Pebble Project is still in the development stage and no saleable minerals are being produced.

The cost of an item of plant and equipment consists of the purchase price, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, and an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling and removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located.

Depreciation is provided at rates calculated to write off the cost of plant and equipment, less their estimated residual value, using the declining balance method at various rates ranging from 20% to 30% per annum.

An item of equipment is derecognized upon disposal or when no future economic benefits are expected to arise from the continued use of the asset. Any gain or loss arising on disposal of the asset, determined as the difference between the net disposal proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset, is recognized in profit or loss.

Where an item of equipment consists of major components with different useful lives, the components are accounted for as separate items of equipment. Expenditures incurred to replace a component of an item of equipment that is accounted for separately, including major inspection and overhaul expenditures, are capitalized.

Residual values and estimated useful lives are reviewed at least annually.

 (h) Impairment of Non-Financial Assets

At the end of each reporting period the carrying amounts of the Group’s non-financial assets are reviewed to determine whether there is any indication that these assets are impaired. If any such indication exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated in order to determine the extent of the impairment loss, if any. Where it is not possible to estimate the recoverable amount of an individual asset, the Group estimates the recoverable amount of the cash-generating unit to which the asset belongs. The recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell and value in use. Fair value is determined as the amount that would be obtained from the sale of the asset in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable and willing parties. In assessing value in use, the estimated future cash flows are discounted to their present value using a pre-tax discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the asset. If the recoverable amount of an asset is estimated to be less than its carrying amount, the carrying amount of the asset is reduced to its recoverable amount and the impairment loss is recognized in profit or loss for the period. For an asset that does not generate largely independent cash inflows, the recoverable amount is determined for the cash generating unit to which the asset belongs.

Where an impairment loss subsequently reverses, the carrying amount of the asset (or cash-generating unit) is increased to the revised estimate of its recoverable amount. This increase in the carrying amount is limited to the carrying amount that would have been determined had no impairment loss been recognized for the asset (or cash-generating unit) in prior years. A reversal of an impairment loss is recognized immediately in profit or loss. The Group has not recorded any impairment charges in the years presented.

(i) Share Capital, Special Warrants and Warrants

Common shares, special warrants and warrants (notes 7(b)-(c)) are classified as equity. Transaction costs directly attributable to the issue of common shares, share purchase options, special warrants and warrants are recognized as a deduction from equity, net of any tax effects. Where units comprising of common shares and warrants are issued (note 7(b)), the proceeds and any transaction costs are apportioned between the common shares and warrants according to their relative fair values.

Upon conversion of special warrants and warrants into common shares, the carrying amount, net of a pro rata share of the transaction costs, is transferred to common share capital.

(j) Share-based Payment Transactions

Equity-settled share-based Option Plan

The Group operates an equity-settled share-based option plan for its employees and service providers (note 7(d)). The fair value of share purchase options granted is recognized as an employee or consultant expense with a corresponding increase in the equity-settled share-based payments reserve in equity (the “Equity Reserve”). An individual is classified as an employee when the individual is an employee for legal or tax purposes (“direct employee”) or provides services similar to those performed by a direct employee.

The fair value is measured at grant date for each tranche, which is expensed on a straight line basis over the vesting period, with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve. The fair value of share purchase options granted is measured using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, taking into account the terms and conditions upon which the share purchase options were granted and forfeiture rates as appropriate. At the end of each reporting period, the amount recognized as an expense is adjusted to reflect the actual number of share purchase options that are expected to vest.

Deferred Share Unit (“DSU”) Plan

The Group has a DSU plan for its non-executive directors. The Group determines whether to account for DSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of DSUs granted is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity-settled or a liability is raised if cash-settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at grant date and expensed over the vesting period as share-based compensation in the statement of loss and comprehensive loss until they are fully vested. If the DSUs are cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares.

Restricted Share Unit (“RSU”) Plan

The Group has a RSU plan for its employees, executive directors and eligible consultants of the Group. The Group determines whether to account for the RSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of RSUs is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity –settled or a liability is raised if cash settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the number of RSUs and the quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at the grant date. It is then expensed over the vesting period with the credit recognized in equity in the Equity Reserve. If cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the quoted market value of the Company’s common shares.

(k) Income Taxes

Income tax on the profit or loss for the years presented comprises current and deferred tax. Income tax is recognized in profit or loss except to the extent that it relates to items recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or directly in equity, in which case it is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or equity.

Current tax expense is the expected tax payable on the taxable income for the year, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at year end, adjusted for amendments to tax payable with regard to previous years.

Deferred tax is provided using the balance sheet liability method, providing for unused tax loss carry forwards and temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for taxation purposes. The following temporary differences are not provided for: goodwill not deductible for tax purposes; the initial recognition of assets or liabilities that affect neither accounting nor taxable profit; and differences relating to investments in subsidiaries, associates, and joint ventures to the extent that they will probably not reverse in the foreseeable future. The amount of deferred tax provided is based on the expected manner of realization or settlement of the carrying amount of assets and liabilities, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at the end of the reporting period applicable to the period of expected realization or settlement.

A deferred tax asset is recognized only to the extent that it is probable that future taxable profits will be available against which the asset can be utilized.

Additional income taxes that arise from the distribution of dividends are recognized at the same time as the liability to pay the related dividend.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are offset when there is a legally enforceable right to set off current tax assets against current tax liabilities and when they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation authority and the Group intends to settle its current tax assets and liabilities on a net basis.

 (l) Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Environmental Obligations

An obligation to incur restoration, rehabilitation and environmental costs arises when environmental disturbance is caused by the exploration or development of a mineral property interest. Such costs arising from the decommissioning of plant and other site preparation work, discounted to their net present value, are provided for and capitalized at the start of each project to the carrying amount of the asset, along with a corresponding liability as soon as the obligation to incur such costs arises. The timing of the actual rehabilitation expenditure is dependent on a number of factors such as the life and nature of the asset, the operating license conditions and, when applicable, the environment in which the mine operates.

Discount rates using a pre-tax rate that reflects the time value of money are used to calculate the net present value. These costs are charged against profit or loss over the economic life of the related asset, through amortization using either the unit-of-production or the straight line method. The corresponding liability is progressively increased as the effect of discounting unwinds, creating an expense recognized in profit or loss.

Decommissioning costs are also adjusted for changes in estimates. Those adjustments are accounted for as a change in the corresponding capitalized cost, except where a reduction in costs is greater than the unamortized capitalized cost of the related assets, in which case the capitalized cost is reduced to nil and the remaining adjustment is recognized in profit or loss.

The operations of the Group have been, and may in the future be, affected from time to time in varying degree by changes in environmental regulations, including those for site restoration costs. Both the likelihood of new regulations and their overall effect upon the Group are not predictable.

The Group has no material restoration, rehabilitation and environmental obligations as the disturbance to date is immaterial. As a condition for the issue of the Miscellaneous Land Use Permit at the Pebble Project, the Pebble Partnership has posted a bond with the Alaskan regulatory authorities as performance guarantee for any potential reclamation liability (note 6(b)).

(m) Loss per Share

The Group presents basic and diluted loss per share information for its common shares, calculated by dividing the loss attributable to common shareholders of the Group by the weighted average number of common shares and any fully prepaid special warrants outstanding during the year. Diluted loss per share does not adjust the loss attributable to common shareholders or the weighted average number of common shares outstanding when the effect is anti-dilutive.

(n) Segment Reporting

The Group operates in a single reportable operating segment – the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties. The Group’s core asset, the Pebble Project, is located in Alaska, USA.

(o) Significant Accounting Estimates and Judgments

The preparation of these Financial Statements requires management to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the Financial Statements and reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. Actual outcomes could differ from these estimates. These Financial Statements include estimates which, by their nature, are uncertain. The impacts of such estimates are pervasive throughout the Financial Statements, and may require accounting adjustments based on future occurrences. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. These estimates are based on historical experience, current and future economic conditions and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Sources of estimation uncertainty

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty that management has made at the end of the reporting period, that could result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities, in the event that actual results differ from assumptions made, relate to, but are not limited to, the following:

1.

The Group uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to calculate the fair value of share purchase options granted for determining share-based compensation included in the loss for the year. Inputs used in this model require subjective assumptions, including the expected price volatility from three to five years. Changes in the subjective input assumptions can affect the fair value estimate. The weighted average assumptions applied are disclosed in note 7(d).

2.

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty are made in determining the provision for any deferred income tax expense included in the loss for the year and the composition of any deferred income tax liabilities included in the Statement of Financial Position.

Critical accounting judgments

These include:

1.	In terms of IFRS 6, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources, management determined that there were no circumstance and facts that indicated that testing the Group’s mineral property interest (“MPI”) for impairment was necessary.
2.	Pursuant to IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates (“IAS 21”) in determining the functional currency of the parent and its subsidiaries, the Group used judgment in identifying the currency in which financing activities are denominated and the currency that mainly influences the cost of undertaking the business activities in each jurisdiction in which each entity operates.
3.	The Group has employed judgement that going concern was an appropriate basis for the preparation of the Financial Statements, as the Group considered existing and future available financial resources in determining that such financial resources are able to meet key corporate and Pebble Project expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months (note 1).
4.	The Group employed judgment in the accounting for the non-refundable early option price installment received by the Group pursuant to the framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (note 3) as a non-current liability at the reporting date as no interest in the Pebble Partnership had been acquired or an option agreement to acquire an interest had been entered into.

(p) Amendments, Interpretations, Revised and New Standards Adopted by the Group

The Group adopted the following amendments and annual improvements that became effective January 1, 2017:

● Amendments to IAS 7, Statement of Cash Flows – Disclosure Initiative

● Amendments to IAS 12, Income Taxes – Recognition of Deferred Tax Assets for Unrealised Losses

● Annual improvements to IFRS 2014 – 2016 Cycle – Amendments to IFRS 12, Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities

The amendments and annual improvements had no material effect on the Financial Statements.

Early adoption

● Amendments to IFRS 2, Share-based Payment (“IFRS 2”) – Classification and Measurement of Share-based Payment Transactions

The amendments to IFRS 2 clarify: a) the accounting for cash-settled share-based payment transactions that include a performance condition and include accounting requirements; b) the classification of share based payment transactions with net settlement features. This amendment provides for an exception for a share-based payment arrangement that is settled on a net basis to be classified as equity-settled in its entirety provided the share-based payment would have been classified as equity-settled had it not included the net settlement feature; and c) the accounting for modifications of share-based payment transactions from cash-settled to equity-settled. The amendments are effective for annual periods on or after January 1, 2018 with early application permitted.

The Group has early adopted these amendments and accordingly has classified share-based compensation with a net settlement feature as equity-settled and measured it accordingly (note 7(f)).

(q) Accounting Standards, Amendments and Revised Standards Not Yet Effective

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2018

● IFRS 9, Financial Instruments (“IFRS 9”)

IFRS 9 replaces IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, in its entirety. The standard incorporates a number of improvements: a) includes a logical model for classification and measurement (IFRS 9 provides for principle-based approach to classification which is driven by cash flow characteristics and the business model in which an asset is held); b) includes a single, forward-looking “expected loss” impairment model (IFRS 9 will require entities to account for expected credit losses from when financial instruments are first recognized and to recognize full lifetime expected losses on a timely basis); and c) includes a substantially-reformed model for hedge accounting with enhanced disclosures about risk management activity (IFRS 9’s new model aligns the accounting treatment with risk management activities). The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 9 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements given the extent of its current use of financial instruments.

● IFRS 15, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“IFRS 15”)

IFRS 15 supersedes IAS 11, Construction Contracts, IAS 18, Revenue, IFRIC 13, Customer Loyalty Programmes, IFRIC 15, Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate, IFRIC 18, Transfers of Assets from Customers and SIC 31, Revenue – Barter Transactions Involving Advertising Services. IFRS 15 establishes a single five-step model framework for determining the nature, amount, timing and certainty of revenue and cash flows arising from a contract with a customer. The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 15 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements as the Group does not generate significant revenue given the Group’s current stage of development of the Pebble Project. The Group will reassess the impact once significant revenue is generated.

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2019

● IFRS 16, Leases (“IFRS 16”).

The IASB issued IFRS 16 and revised IAS 17 in January 2016. IFRS 16 specifies how to recognize, measure, present and disclose leases. IFRS 16 provides a single lessee accounting model, requiring the recognition of assets and liabilities for all leases, unless the term of the lease is twelve months or less or the underlying asset has a low value. Lessor accounting however remains unchanged from IAS 17 and the distinction between operating and finance leases is retained. IFRS 16 now prescribes the accounting policies and disclosures applicable to leases, both for lessees and lessors.

The Group will adopt IFRS 16 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will not have a significant impact other than the accounting for office, accommodation and storage leases the Group may have entered into where the minimum lease term is more than 12 months.

XML

Framework Agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd.

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Framework Agreement With First Quantum Minerals Ltd.

Framework Agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd.

3. FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT WITH FIRST QUANTUM MINERALS LTD.

In December 2017, the Group announced the signing of a framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (“First Quantum”). The framework agreement contemplates that an affiliate of First Quantum may subsequently execute an option agreement with the Group. The option agreement contemplates an option payment of US$150 million staged over four years which will entitle First Quantum to acquire the right to earn a 50% interest in the Pebble Partnership for US$1.35 billion. The option period may be extended for up to 2 years by First Quantum making payments to be agreed upon which amounts will be offset against the US$1.35 billion additional investment amount. The Group received a non-refundable early option payment of US$37,500 ($48,308) (“Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment”). The Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment is to be applied solely for the purpose of progressing the permitting of the Pebble Project.

As the entry by First Quantum into the option agreement is contingent upon the completion of due diligence, obtaining necessary regulatory approvals and the successful negotiation of the final form of the option agreement and associated commercial agreements, the Group has recorded the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment as a non-current payable.

XML

Mineral Property, Plant and Equipment

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Property, plant and equipment [abstract]

Mineral Property, Plant and Equipment

4. MINERAL PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT

The Group’s exploration and evaluation assets are comprised of the following:

Year ended December 31, 2017	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	881		$	113,422
Additions		–		473			473
Ending balance		112,541		1,354			113,895
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Depreciation 2		–		(176	)		(176	)
Ending balance		–		(734	)		(734	)
Foreign currency translation difference		20,361		189			20,550
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	132,902	$	809		$	133,711

Year ended December 31, 2016	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	1,032		$	113,573
Dispositions		–		(151	)		(151	)
Ending balance		112,541		881			113,422
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(481	)		(481	)
Depreciation 2		–		(205	)		(205	)
Eliminated on disposal		–		128			128
Ending balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Foreign currency translation difference		29,381		227			29,608
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	141,922	$	550		$	142,472

Notes to tables:

1.	Comprises the Pebble Project, a contiguous block of 2,402 mineral claims covering approximately 417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.
2.	Depreciation is included in exploration and evaluation expenses.

XML

Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Amounts Receivable And Prepaid Expenses

Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses

5. AMOUNTS RECEIVABLE AND PREPAID EXPENSES

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Sales tax receivable	$	96	$	50
Amounts receivable		487		138
Prepaid expenses		411		491
Total	$	994	$	679

XML

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Cash and cash equivalents [abstract]

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash

6.	CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AND RESTRICTED CASH
(a)	Cash and Cash Equivalents

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Business and savings accounts 1	$	62,830	$	7,196
Guaranteed Investment Certificates		4,328		–
Total	$	67,158	$	7,196

Note:

1. $47,149 of this amount relates to the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment of US$37,500 received which is to be used solely for progressing permitting at the Pebble Project (note 3).

Supplementary cash flow information

Non-cash investing and financing activities:

In the year ended December 31, 2017:

● 61,500 warrants were exercised into common shares for which payment was received subsequent to the reporting date (note 7(a)); and

● 22,094 common shares were issued to settle the payout of vested RSUs (note 7(f)).

(b) Restricted Cash

The Group has a cash deposit of US$600 ($757) with a United States financial institution which has been pledged as collateral to the surety provider for the surety bond accepted by the Alaskan regulatory authorities (see below). The cash deposit will be released once any reclamation work required has been performed and assessed by the Alaskan regulatory authorities.

The Group posted a bond of US$2,000 with the Alaskan regulatory authorities for a performance guarantee related to any potential reclamation liability as a condition of the Miscellaneous Land Use Permit granted to the Pebble Partnership for its ongoing activities on the Pebble Project.

XML

Capital and Reserves

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Capital commitments [abstract]

Capital and Reserves

7.	CAPITAL AND RESERVES
(a)	Authorized Share Capital

At December 31, 2017, the authorized share capital comprised an unlimited (2016 – unlimited) number of common shares with no par value. As of the reporting date, 308,176,356 common shares were issued and fully paid. A further 61,500 common shares were issued but were delivered and paid for subsequent to December 31, 2017 (note 6(a)).

(b) Financings and Other

January 2017

The Group completed a bought deal offering (the “Offering”) of 20,240,000 common shares at US$1.85 per common share for gross proceeds of US$37,440 ($49,067). The Offering was completed by way of a prospectus filed in all of the provinces of Canada, other than Québec, and was offered in the United States pursuant to a prospectus filed as part of an effective registration statement on Form F-10 filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under the Canada/U.S. multi-jurisdictional disclosure system. After transaction costs of $3,180, including a 5% commission paid to the underwriters, the Group raised net proceeds of $45,887.

July 2016

In July 2016, the Group completed a private placement of 4,444,376 units in the capital of the Company, each unit comprising of one common share and one share purchase warrant, at a price of $0.45 per unit for gross proceeds of $2,000. Each share purchase warrant is exercisable into one common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021. The Group incurred $33 in issuance costs related to regulatory and legal fees. The Group apportioned the gross proceeds and issuance costs between share capital and warrants based on their relative fair values on date of issue. Accordingly, net proceeds of $1,264 was allocated to share capital and $703 to warrants.

June 2016

The Group completed a prospectus offering of 38,000,000 units in the capital of the Company at a price of $0.45 per unit for gross proceeds of approximately $17,100. Each Unit consisted of one common share and one common share purchase warrant, which entitles the holder to purchase an additional common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021. The Group incurred a total of $1,072 in issuance costs related to agents, advisory, regulatory and legal fees. The Group apportioned the gross proceeds and issuance costs between share capital and warrants based on the relative fair values of the common shares and warrants on date of issue. Accordingly, net proceeds of $10,347 was allocated to share capital and $5,683 to warrants.

(c) Share Purchase Warrants and Options not Issued under the Group’s Incentive Plan

The following tables reconciles warrants and non-employee options (options which are not issued under the Group’s incentive plan (note 7(d)), each exercisable to acquire one common share, for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 respectively:

			Year ended December 31, 2017
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date		Beginning Balance		Issued		Exercised			Expired			Ending Balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.37		July 23, 2017		18,800		–		(18,800	)		–			–
0.37		June 30, 2019		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.40		June 30, 2019		148,050		–		(100,000	)		–			48,050
0.37		March 10, 2021		9,400		–		–			–			9,400
0.40		March 10, 2021		82,250		–		–			–			82,250
0.37		December 15, 2021		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
0.40		December 12, 2022		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.29		December 8, 2024		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
Total				446,500		–		(118,800	)		–			327,700
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55		July 9, 2020		11,288,698		–		(4,163,052	)		–			7,125,646
3.00		September 14, 2017		2,871,676		–		(8,952	)		(2,862,724	)		–
Total				14,160,374		–		(4,172,004	)		(2,862,724	)		7,125,646
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65		June 10, 2021		39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Total				39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Grand Total				54,003,284		–		(15,829,001	)		(2,862,724	)		35,311,559

		Year ended December 31, 2016
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date	Beginning balance	Issued	Exercised	Expired	Ending balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.29	January 29, 2016	150,400	–	(150,400)	–	–
0.37	January 29, 2016	220,900	–	(61,100)	(159,800)	–
0.40	January 29, 2016	150,400	–	–	(150,400)	–
0.43	January 29, 2016	37,600	–	–	(37,600)	–
0.37	July 23, 2017	18,800	–	–	–	18,800
0.37	June 30, 2019	56,400	–	–	–	56,400
0.40	June 30, 2019	225,600	–	(77,550)2	–	148,050
0.37	March 10, 2021	9,400	–	–	–	9,400
0.40	March 10, 2021	150,400	–	(68,150)2	–	82,250
0.37	December 15, 2021	37,600	–	–	–	37,600
0.40	December 12, 2022	75,200	–	(18,800)	–	56,400
0.29	December 8, 2024	37,600	–	–	–	37,600
Total		1,170,300	–	(376,000)	(347,800)	446,500
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55	July 9, 2020	13,801,672	–	(2,512,974)	–	11,288,698
3.00	September 14, 2017	2,871,676	–	–	–	2,871,676
Total		16,673,348	–	(2,512,974)	–	14,160,374
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65	June 10, 2021	–	42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Total		–	42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Grand Total		17,843,648	42,444,376	(5,936,940)	(347,800)	54,003,284

Notes to tables:

1.	Pursuant to the acquisition of Cannon Point Resources Ltd. (“Cannon Point”) and Mission Gold Ltd. (“Mission Gold”) in October 2015 and December 2015 respectively, the Group exchanged options and warrants outstanding in these companies for options and warrants to purchase shares in the Company.
2.	The numbers have been revised to correct a disclosure error in 2016 as 56,400 options exercised were incorrectly allocated to options with an expiry of June 30, 2019 instead of options with an expiry of March 10, 2021. There was no impact on loss and loss per share.
3.	Refer to the 2016 prospectus and private placement financings in Note 7(b).

At December 31, 2017, warrants and non-employee options had a weighted average exercise price of $0.63 (December 31, 2016 – $0.75) and a weighted average remaining life of 3.26 years (December 31, 2016 – 4.05 years).

(d) Share Purchase Option Compensation Plan

The Group has a share purchase option plan approved by the Group’s shareholders that allows the Board of Directors to grant share purchase options, subject to regulatory terms and approval, to its officers, directors, employees, and service providers. The share purchase option plan (the “2017 Rolling Option Plan”) is based on the maximum number of eligible shares equaling a rolling percentage of up to 10% of the Company’s outstanding common shares including any issuances from the Group’s RSU and DSU plans, calculated from time to time. Pursuant to the 2017 Rolling Option Plan, if outstanding share purchase options (“options”) are exercised and the number of issued and outstanding common shares of the Company increases, then the options available to grant under the plan increase proportionately (assuming there are no issuances under the RSU and DSU plans). The exercise price of each option is set by the Board of Directors at the time of grant but cannot be less than the market price, being the 5-day volume weighted average trading price calculated the day before the grant. Options can have a maximum term of five years and typically terminate 90 days following the termination of the optionee’s employment or engagement. In the case of death or retirement, any outstanding vested options will expire the earlier of the expiry date or one year from date of death or retirement. The vesting period for options is at the discretion of the Board of Directors at the time the options are granted.

The following summarizes the Group’s options outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of options	Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)
Beginning balance		15,861,131			0.92		9,755,600			1.27
Granted		5,808,000			1.75		6,806,000			0.49
Expired		(508,100	)		2.88		(27,000	)		15.44
Exercised		(1,277,200	)		1.38		(548,869	)		0.92
Forfeited		(36,400	)		0.89		(38,000	)		0.50
Cancelled		–			–		(86,600	)		1.40
Ending balance		19,847,431			1.08		15,861,131			0.92

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group granted 133,200 (2016 – 150,000) options to consultants for advisory and administrative consulting services. The Group determined that given the nature of the services being provided and that are continued to be provided, it could not determine the fair value of these services reliably. As a consequence, the Group estimated that the value of these services approximated the fair value of the options granted measured using the Black-Scholes option pricing model which at December 31, 2017 amounted to $90 (2016 – $107).

For options granted in the year ended December 31, 2017, the weighted average fair value was estimated at $1.19 (2016 – $0.46) per option and was based on the Black-Scholes option pricing model using the following weighted average assumptions:

Assumptions	2017		2016
Risk-free interest rate		1.54%		0.54%
Expected life		4.51 years		4.73 years
Expected volatility 1		93.82%		82.89%
Grant date share price		$1.74		$0.67
Expected dividend yield		Nil		Nil

Note:

1. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s closing share price on the TSX.

Details of options exercised during each year were as follows:

Year ended December 31, 2017
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
January 2017		502,200		1.60		3.70
February 2017		484,000		1.65		3.15
April 2017		15,000		0.89		2.03
May 2017		223,000		0.51		2.40
July 2017		10,000		0.50		1.78
September 2017		3,000		0.50		2.28
November 2017		40,000		0.50		2.56
		1,277,200		1.38		3.19

Year ended December 31, 2016
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
August 2016		10,000		0.49		0.96
September 2016		46,667		0.50		1.00
October 2016		60,000		0.50		0.97
November 2016		271,668		1.20		1.56
December 2016		160,534		0.74		2.44
		548,869		0.92		1.70

The following tables summarize information about the Group’s options as at December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Options outstanding	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		600,000		4.21
0.49		6,058,000		3.26		6,147,000		4.25
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		3,266,831		3.23
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,125,000		1.29		1,180,500		2.20
1.75		5,796,600		4.09		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		19,847,431		2.89		15,861,131		3.11

Options exercisable	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		200,000		4.21
0.49		4,001,340		3.26		2,009,670		4.28
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		2,074,676		3.27
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,099,998		1.29		1,113,498		2.22
1.75		1,936,000		4.08		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		13,905,169		2.51		10,064,644		2.61

(e) Deferred Share Units (“DSUs”)

The Group has a DSU plan approved by the Group’s shareholders in 2015 which allows the Board, at its discretion, to award DSUs to non-executive directors for services rendered to the Group and also provides that non-executive directors may elect to receive up to 100% of their annual compensation in DSUs. The aggregate number of DSUs outstanding pursuant to the DSU plan may not exceed 2% of the issued and outstanding common shares ("Shares") from time to time provided the total does not result in the total Shares issuable under all the Group’s share-based compensation plans (i.e. including Share purchase option and RSU plans) exceeding 10% of the total number of issued outstanding Shares. DSUs are payable when the non-executive director ceases to be a director including in the event of death. DSUs may be settled in Shares issued from treasury, by the delivery to the former director of Shares purchased by the Group in the open market, payment in cash, or any combination thereof, at the discretion of the Group.

In the year ended December 31, 2017, there were no new grants of DSUs. At December 31, 2017, a total of 458,129 DSUs were outstanding (2016 – 458,129).

 (f) Restricted Share Units (“RSUs”)

The Group’s RSU plan which was approved by the Group’s shareholders, allows the Board to grant employees, executive directors and consultants RSUs from time to time. The RSUs are granted conditionally and entitle the recipient to receive one share (or the cash equivalent) upon attainment of a time-based vesting period. The RSU plan limits the aggregate number of RSUs outstanding to 3% of the issued and outstanding Shares from time to time provided the total does not result in the total Shares issuable under all the Group’s share-based compensation plans (i.e. including Share purchase option and RSU plans) exceeding 10% of the total number of issued outstanding Shares. RSUs can be settled by the Group at its discretion in Shares issued from treasury, by the delivery of Shares purchased by the Group in the open market, payment in cash or in any combination thereof.

The following summarizes the Group’s RSUs outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of RSUs	Number of RSUs			Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)		Number of RSUs		Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)
Beginning Balance		639,031			0.69		–		–
Granted 2, 3		542,371			2.24		639,031		0.69
Cash-settled 1		(639,031	)		0.69		–		–
Withheld 3		(13,782	)		2.23		–		–
Shares issued 3		(22,094	)		2.23		–		–
Ending Balance		506,495			2.24		639,031		0.69

Notes

1.	On July 11, 2017, 639,031 RSUs granted to the Group’s Board Chair, Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) vested. The Group settled the equity obligation by making a cash payment of $1,098 based on the 5 day average of TSX closing prices for the Company’s common shares up to July 11, 2017 of $1.72 per RSU pursuant to the terms of the RSU Plan. This payment has been recognized as a decrease in the equity-settled share-based compensation reserve in equity (“SBC Reserve”). In the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $232 (2016 – $209) as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve.
2.	On July 27, 2017, the Group’s Compensation Committee approved a 2016 executive short term incentive bonus/compensation of $951 to the Group’s Board Chair, CEO and CFO payable through a combination of cash and RSUs. Of the total compensation, $190 was paid in cash with the balance paid by the grant of 434,742 RSUs. The RSUs have a one year term and vest on July 28, 2018. The Group has determined that this grant should be accounted for as cash-settled given the cash settlement of the previous grant to the same individuals (see 1 above). Accordingly, during the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $419 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in a RSU liability for this grant based on the TSX closing price of the Company’s common shares as of the reporting date. At the end of each reporting period, until the RSU liability is settled, the RSU liability’s fair value is remeasured based on the TSX closing price for common shares multiplied by the number of RSUs that will vest and be converted into common shares, and amortized over the vesting period of the RSUs, with any change in fair value charged to share-based compensation.
3.	On September 15, 2017, the Group granted 107,629 RSUs to the CEO of the Pebble Limited Partnership ("PLP CEO") with the following vesting terms: 1/3 vested on grant date; 1/3 vest 1 year from grant date; and 1/3 vest 2 years from grant date. The RSU terms also stipulate that settlement is to be paid out in common shares and the RSUs have a net settlement feature for withholding tax obligations. The Group has treated these RSUs in their entirety as equity-settled as a result of early adopting the amendments to IFRS 2 (note 2(p)). The fair value of the RSUs granted was $240 based on the TSX closing price for the Company’s shares at date of grant. With the first tranche of 35,876 RSUs that vested on date of grant, 13,782 RSUs were withheld to settle and pay the PLP CEO’s tax obligations of $30 and the balance of 22,094 RSUs were issued to the PLP CEO as common shares. The Group has recognized $115 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve during the year ended December 31, 2017.

 (g) Foreign Currency Translation Reserve

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Beginning balance	$	36,233		$	40,479
Foreign exchange translation differences incurred:
Loss on translation of foreign subsidiaries		(8,299	)		(4,246	)
Ending balance	$	27,934		$	36,233

The foreign currency translation reserve represents accumulated exchange differences arising on the translation of the results of operations and net assets of the Group’s subsidiaries with a US dollar functional currency into the Group’s presentation currency (the Canadian dollar).

XML

Related Party Balances and Transactions

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Related party transactions [abstract]

Related Party Balances and Transactions

8. RELATED PARTY BALANCES AND TRANSACTIONS

The components of transactions to related parties is as follows:

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Payables to related parties
Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (b)	$	540	$	240
Key management personnel (a)		93		–
RSU liability (a)		419		–
	$	1,052	$	240

Balances and transactions between the Company and its subsidiaries, which are related parties of the Company, have been eliminated on consolidation (note 2(c)). Details between the Group and other related parties are disclosed below:

(a) Transactions and Balances with Key Management Personnel (“KMP”)

The aggregate value of transactions with KMP, being the Group’s directors and officers including the Chief Financial Officer ("CFO"), Company Secretary, Senior Vice President ("SVP") Corporate Development, Vice President ("VP"), Corporate Communications, VP, Engineering and VP, Public Affairs, and Pebble Partnership ("PLP") senior management, the CEO, Executive VP, Public Affairs, SVP, Corporate Affairs, VP, Permitting and Chair of Pebble Mines Corp ("PMC Chair"), was as follows for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Transactions	2017		2016 5
Compensation
Amounts paid and payable to HDSI for services of KMP employed by HDSI 1	$	3,306	$	2,274
Amounts paid and payable to KMP 2		2,438		2,262
Bonuses paid to KMP 3		1,660		–
		7,404		4,536
Share-based compensation 4		4,650		2,428
Total compensation	$	12,054	$	6,964

Notes to previous table:

1.	The Group’s CEO, CFO, Board Chair and senior management, other than disclosed in 2 below, are employed by the Group through Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (“HDSI”) (refer (b)).
2.	Represents short term employee benefits, including salaries and director’s fees paid and payable to the Group’s independent directors, PLP CEO, PMC Chair and PLP EVP, SVP and VP.
3.	Performance bonuses were paid to the PLP CEO for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years, incentive bonuses were paid or payable to the SVP, Corporate Development, VP, Engineering (payable to HDSI) and the PLP VP Permitting. In addition, the Group’s CEO and CFO were paid an incentive bonus/compensation for 2016.
4.	Includes cost of DSUs, RSUs and share purchase options issued during the period.
5.	In the year ended December 31, 2016, the amounts paid and payable to KMP have been revised to correct for a non-material disclosure omission. This omission had no effect on the Statement of Loss and Comprehensive Loss and loss and diluted loss per share.

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group settled vested KMP RSUs by making an aggregate cash payment of $1,098 (note 7(f)) (2016 – $nil) and 218,800 (2016 – Nil) options were exercised by KMP with a weighted average exercise price of $0.47 and a weighted average market price on exercise of $2.36 for proceeds to the Group of $103.

(b) Transactions and Balances with other Related Parties

Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. is a private company that provides geological, engineering, environmental, corporate development, financial, administrative and management services to the Group and its subsidiaries at annually set rates pursuant to a management services agreement. The annually set rates also include a component of overhead costs such as office rent, information technology services and general administrative support services. HDSI also incurs third party costs on behalf of the Group which are reimbursed by the Group at cost. Several directors and other key management personnel of HDSI, who are close business associates, are also key management personnel of the Group.

For the year ended December 31, 2017, and 2016, the aggregate value of transactions were as follows:

Transactions	2017		2016
Services rendered by HDSI:	$	5,219	$	3,584
Technical		2,329		1,157
Engineering		741		83
Environmental		736		375
Socioeconomic		699		660
Other technical services		153		39
General and administrative		2,890		2,427
Management, corporate communications, secretarial, financial and administration		2,225		1,908
Shareholder communication		665		519
Reimbursement of third party expenses		658		499
Conferences and travel		309		175
Insurance		62		54
Office supplies and information technology		287		270
Total value of transactions	$	5,877	$	4,083

XML

Trade and Other Payables

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Trade and other payables [abstract]

Trade and Other Payables

9. TRADE AND OTHER PAYABLES

	December 31		December 31
Falling due within the year	2017		2016
Trade 1	$	10,268	$	1,260
Total	$	10,268	$	1,260
Non-current liabilities
Trade 1	$	6,650	$	-
Total	$	6,650	$	-

Notes:

1. Legal fees

As a result of the joint settlement with the EPA announced in May 2017, the Company’s legal counsel are due US$16,602 in additional legal fees of which US$15,867 is payable in three annual instalments of US5,289 and the balance of US$735 is payable within the year. The first annual instalment was paid in December 2017. The next two annual instalments of $6,650 (US$5,289) are payable in December 2018 and 2019 and have been included in current and non-current payables respectively. Of the balance of US$735, US$100 was paid in December 2017. The remaining balance of US$635 ($798) has been included in current payables.

XML

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Basic and diluted earnings per share [abstract]

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share

10. BASIC AND DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE

The calculation of basic and diluted loss per share was based on the following for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

	2017		2016
Loss attributable to common shareholders	$	64,865	$	26,982
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (000s)		300,511		246,161

Diluted loss per share does not include the effect of 19,847,431 (2016 – 15,861,131) employee share purchase options outstanding, 35,311,559 (2016 – 54,003,284) non-employee share purchase options and warrants, 458,129 DSUs and 506,495 RSUs as they are anti-dilutive.

XML

Employment Costs

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Employment Costs

Employment Costs

11. EMPLOYMENT COSTS

During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recorded $16,342 (2016 – $10,626) in salaries and benefits, including share-based payments of $5,858 (2016 – $2,995) and amounts paid to HDSI for services provided to the Group by HDSI personnel (note 8(b)).

XML

Income Tax Expense

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details

Income Tax Expense

12. INCOME TAX EXPENSE

		Year ended December 31
		2017		2016
Current tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Current income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–

	Year ended December 31
Reconciliation of effective tax rate	2017			2016
Net loss	$	(64,865	)	$	(26,982	)
Total income tax (recovery) expense		–			–
Loss excluding income tax		(64,865	)		(26,982	)
Income tax using the Company’s domestic tax rate		(16,865	)		(7,015	)
Non-deductible expenses and other		(1,914	)		512
Change in tax rates		(2,950	)		–
Deferred income tax assets not recognized		21,729			6,503
	$	–		$	–

The Company’s domestic tax rate for the year was 26% (2016 – 26%).

	December 31			December 31
Deferred income tax assets (liabilities)	2017			2016
Tax losses	$	2,617		$	3,214
Net deferred income tax assets		2,617			3,214
Resource property/investment in Pebble Partnership		(2,472	)		(3,191	)
Equipment		(145	)		(23	)
Net deferred income tax liability	$	–		$	–

The Group had the following temporary differences at December 31, 2017 in respect of which no deferred tax asset has been recognized:

			Resource
Expiry	Tax losses		pools		Other
Within one year	$	–	$	–	$	–
One to five years		–		–		4,795
After five years		129,239		–		–
No expiry date		78		101,303		196
Total	$	129,317	$	101,303	$	4,991

The Group has taxable temporary differences in relation to investments in foreign subsidiaries or branches of $8.7 million (2016 – $7.8 million) which was not recognized because the Group controls the reversal of liabilities and it is expected it will not reverse in the foreseeable future.

XML

Financial Risk Management

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Financial Risk Management

Financial Risk Management

13. FINANCIAL RISK MANAGEMENT

The Group is exposed in varying degrees to a variety of financial instrument related risks. The Board approves and monitors the risk management processes, inclusive of documented investment policies, counterparty limits, and controlling and reporting structures. The type of risk exposure and the way in which such exposure is managed is provided as follows:

(a) Credit Risk

Credit risk is the risk of potential loss to the Group if a counterparty to a financial instrument fails to meet its contractual obligations. The Group’s credit risk is primarily attributable to its liquid financial assets, including cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and amounts receivable. The Group limits the exposure to credit risk by only investing its cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash with high-credit quality financial institutions in business and saving accounts, guaranteed investment certificates, and in government treasury bills which are available on demand by the Group when required. Amounts receivable (note 5) include receivable balances with government agencies and refundable deposits. The following is the Group’s maximum exposure:

	December 31		December 31
Exposure	2017		2016
Amounts receivable	$	487	$	138
Restricted cash		757		–
Cash and cash equivalents		67,158		7,196
Total exposure	$	68,402	$	7,334

(b) Liquidity Risk

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Group will not be able to meet its financial obligations when they become due. The Group ensures, as far as reasonably possible, it will have sufficient capital in order to meet short to medium term business requirements, after taking into account cash flows from operations and the Group’s holdings of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, where applicable. The Group’s cash and cash equivalents at the reporting date were invested in business and savings accounts and guaranteed investment certificates (note 6(a)).

The Group’s financial liabilities are comprised of trade and other payables (note 9) and payables to related parties (note 8), which are due for payment within 12 months from the reporting date, and non-current trade payables, which are due for payment more than 12 months from the reporting date. The carrying amounts of the Group’s financial liabilities represent the Group’s contractual obligations.

(c) Foreign Exchange Risk

The Company is subject to both currency transaction risk and currency translation risk: the Pebble Partnership, Pebble Services Inc. and U5 Resources Inc. have the US dollar as functional currency, and certain of the Company’s corporate expenses are incurred in US dollars. The operating results and financial position of the Group are reported in Canadian dollars in the Group’s consolidated financial statements. As a result the fluctuation of the US dollar in relation to the Canadian dollar will have an impact upon the losses incurred by the Group as well as the value of the Group’s assets and the amount of shareholders’ equity.

The Group has not entered into any agreements or purchased any instruments to hedge possible currency risks.

The exposure of the Group’s US dollar- denominated financial assets and liabilities to foreign exchange risk is as follows:

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Financial assets:
Amounts receivable	$	552		$	326
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash		60,083			2,232
		60,635			2,558
Financial liabilities: Trade and other payables		(16,845	)		(652	)
Net financial (liabilities) assets exposed to foreign currency risk	$	(43,790	)	$	1,906

Based on the above net exposures and assuming that all other variables remain constant, a 10% change in the value of the Canadian dollar relative to the US dollar would result in a gain or loss of $4,379 (2016 – $191) in the year. This sensitivity analysis includes only outstanding foreign currency denominated monetary items.

(d) Interest Rate Risk

The Group is subject to interest rate cash flow risk with respect to its investments in cash and cash equivalents. The Group’s policy is to invest cash at fixed rates of interest and cash reserves are to be maintained in cash and cash equivalents in order to maintain liquidity, while achieving a satisfactory return for shareholders. Fluctuations in interest rates when cash and cash equivalents mature impact interest income earned.

Assuming that all other variables remain constant, a 100 basis points change representing a 1% increase or decrease in interest rates would have resulted in a decrease or increase in loss of $136 (2016 – $73).

(e) Capital Management

The Group’s policy is to maintain a strong capital base so as to maintain investor and creditor confidence and to sustain future development of the business. The capital structure of the Group consists of equity, comprising share capital and reserves, net of accumulated deficit. There were no changes in the Group’s approach to capital management during the year. The Group is not subject to any externally imposed capital requirements.

(f) Fair Value

The fair value of the Group’s financial assets and liabilities approximates the carrying amount.

XML

Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Capital commitments [abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

14.	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
(a)	Leases

The Group has the following commitments as of December 31, 2017:

	Less than   1 Year		Between 1  and   5 years		Later than 5 years		Total
Anchorage office lease 1	US$	179	US$	765	US$	–	US$	944
Pebble Project site leases 2		115		–		–		115
Total	US$	294	US$	765	US$	–	US$	1,059
Total in Canadian dollars 3	$	370	$	961	$	–	$	1,331

Notes:

1.	Lease which expires November 30, 2022.
2.	The Group has leases for a hangar at site and core storage. The hanger lease expires May 1, 2018 and the core yard lease expires June 1, 2018.
3.	Converted at the Wall Street Journal closing rate of $1.2573 per US$1 on December 31, 2017.

(b) Legal Proceedings

On February 14, 2017, short seller investment firm Kerrisdale Capital Management LLC published a negative piece (the "Kerrisdale Report") regarding the Pebble Project. Three putative shareholder class actions were filed against the Company and certain of its current officers and directors in US federal courts, specifically the Central District of California (Los Angeles) and the Southern District of New York (New York City). The cases are captioned: Diaz v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01241 (C.D. Cal.), Kirwin v. Northern Dynasty Minerals Ltd. et al, Case No. 17-cv-01238 (S.D.N.Y.) and Schubert v. Northern Dynasty Minerals, Ltd., et al., Case No. 1:17-CV-02437 (S.D.N.Y.). The complaints appear to rely on the claims made in the Kerrisdale Report and allege damages to a class of investors who purchased shares of the Company prior to the publication of the Kerrisdale Report and allege liability for losses pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 thereunder, as well as control person liability against the individual defendants pursuant to Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The plaintiffs in both the Kirwin and Schubert actions voluntarily dismissed their claims without prejudice. The plaintiffs in the Diaz action continue to litigate and filed an amended complaint. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and the plaintiffs have filed a motion opposing the dismissal to which the Company replied in March 2018. The Company believes that the allegations in the existing complaint are without merit, and it intends to defend itself vigorously in the Diaz action.

XML

Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Significant Accounting Policies

Statement of Compliance

(a) Statement of Compliance

These Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) and interpretations issued by the IFRS Interpretations Committee (“IFRIC”s) that are effective for the Group’s reporting for the year ended December 31, 2017. These Financial Statements were authorized for issue by the Board of Directors on March 28, 2018.

Basis of Preparation

(b) Basis of Preparation

These Financial Statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis using the accrual basis of accounting, except for cash flow information and for financial instruments classified as available-for-sale, which are stated at their fair value (notes 2(e)). The accounting policies set out below have been applied consistently to all periods presented in these Financial Statements.

Basis of Consolidation

(c) Basis of Consolidation

These Financial Statements incorporate the financial statements of the Company, the Company’s subsidiaries, and entities controlled by the Company and its subsidiaries listed below:

Name of Subsidiary	Place of Incorporation	Principal Activity	Ownership
3537137 Canada Inc. 1	Canada	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Pebble Services Inc.	Nevada, USA	Management and services company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Northern Dynasty Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holds 99.9% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership and 100% of Pebble Mines Corp.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Limited Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holding Company and Exploration of the Pebble Project.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Mines Corp.	Delaware, USA	General Partner. Holds 0.1% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble West Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble East Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
U5 Resources Inc. 3	Nevada, USA	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Cannon Point Resources Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
MGL Subco Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Delta Minerals Inc.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of MGL Subco Ltd.	100% (indirect)
Imperial Gold Corporation	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Minerals Inc.	100% (indirect)
Yuma Gold Inc.	Nevada, USA	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Imperial Gold Corporation.	100% (indirect)

Notes:

1.	Holds 20% interest in the Northern Dynasty Partnership. The Company holds the remaining 80% interest.
2.	Both entities together hold 2,182 claims of the Pebble Project.
3.	Holds 220 claims of the Pebble Project. Subsequent to the reporting date, these claims were sold to Pebble West Claims Corporation.

Control is achieved when the Group is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee. Specifically, the Group controls an investee if, and only if, the Company has power over the investee (i.e. existing rights that give it the current ability to direct the relevant activities of the investee); exposure, or rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee; and the ability to use its power over the investee to affect its returns.

Intra-Group balances and transactions, including any unrealized income and expenses arising from intra-Group transactions, are eliminated in preparing the Financial Statements. Unrealized gains arising from transactions with equity accounted investees are eliminated against the investment to the extent of the Group’s interest in the investee. Unrealized losses are eliminated in the same way as unrealized gains, but only to the extent that there is no evidence of impairment.

Foreign Currencies

(d) Foreign Currencies

The functional currency is the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates and has been determined for each entity within the Group. The functional currency of U5 Resources Inc., Pebble Services Inc., Pebble Mines Corp., the Pebble Partnership and its subsidiaries, and Yuma Gold Inc. is the US dollar and for all other entities within the Group, the functional currency is the Canadian dollar. The functional currency determinations were conducted through an analysis of the factors for consideration identified in IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates.

Transactions in currencies other than the functional currency are recorded at the rates of exchange prevailing on the dates of transactions. At the end of each reporting period, monetary assets and liabilities that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the rates prevailing at that date. Non-monetary assets and liabilities carried at fair value that are denominated in foreign currencies are translated at rates prevailing at the date when the fair value was determined. Non-monetary items that are measured in terms of historical cost in a foreign currency are not retranslated.

The results and financial position of entities within the Group which have a functional currency that differs from that of the Group are translated into Canadian dollars as follows: (i) assets and liabilities for each statement of financial position are translated at the closing exchange rate at that date; (ii) income and expenses for each income statement are translated at average exchange rates for the period; and (iii) the resulting exchange differences are included in the foreign currency translation reserve within equity.

Financial Instruments

(e) Financial Instruments

Non-derivative financial assets:

The Group has the following non-derivative financial assets: available-for-sale financial assets (of nominal value) and loans and receivables.

Available-for-sale financial assets

Available-for-sale (“AFS”) financial assets are non-derivatives that are either designated as AFS or are not classified as (i) loans and receivables, (ii) held-to-maturity investments or (iii) financial assets at fair value through profit or loss. The Group’s investments in marketable securities are classified as AFS financial assets. Subsequent to initial recognition, they are measured at fair value and changes therein, other than impairment losses, are recognized in other comprehensive income or loss and accumulated in the investment revaluation reserve within equity. When an investment is derecognized, the cumulative gain or loss in the investment revaluation reserve is transferred to profit or loss.

The fair value of AFS monetary assets denominated in a foreign currency is determined in that foreign currency and translated at the spot rate at the end of the reporting period. The change in fair value attributable to translation differences that result from the amortized cost of the monetary asset is recognized within other comprehensive income or loss. The change in fair value of AFS equity investments is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss.

Loans and receivables

Loans and receivables are financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. Such assets are initially recognized at fair value plus any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition, loans and receivables are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method, less any impairment losses.

Loans and receivables consist of cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash (note 6), and amounts receivable (note 5).

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash

Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash in the statements of financial position are comprised of cash and highly liquid investments having maturity dates of three months or less from the date of purchase, which are readily convertible into known amounts of cash.

The Group’s cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash are invested in business and savings accounts, guaranteed investment certificates and government treasury bills at major financial institutions and are available on demand by the Group when required and, as such, are subject to an insignificant risk of change in value.

Non-derivative financial liabilities:

The Group’s non-derivative financial liabilities comprise of trade and other payables (note 9) and payables to related parties (note 8).

All financial liabilities fall within the classification of other financial liabilities versus financial liabilities through profit or loss, and are recognized initially at fair value net of any directly attributable transaction costs. Subsequent to initial recognition these financial liabilities are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method.

Impairment of financial assets:

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income or loss are reclassified to profit or loss in the period. Financial assets are assessed for indicators of impairment at the end of each reporting period. Financial assets are impaired when there is objective evidence that, as a result of one or more events that occurred after the initial recognition of the financial assets, the estimated future cash flows of the investments have been impacted. For marketable securities classified as AFS, a significant or prolonged decline in the fair value of the securities below their cost is considered to be objective evidence of impairment.

For all other financial assets, objective evidence of impairment could include:

● significant financial difficulty of the issuer or counterparty; or

● default or delinquency in interest or principal payments; or

● it becoming probable that the borrower will enter bankruptcy or financial re-organization.

For certain categories of financial assets, such as amounts receivable, assets that are assessed not to be impaired individually are subsequently assessed for impairment on a collective basis. The carrying amount of financial assets is reduced by the impairment loss directly for all financial assets with the exception of amounts receivable, where the carrying amount is reduced through the use of an allowance account. When an amount receivable is considered uncollectible, it is written off against the allowance account. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are credited against the allowance account. Changes in the carrying amount of the allowance account are recognized in profit or loss.

With the exception of AFS equity instruments, if, in a subsequent period, the amount of the impairment loss decreases and the decrease can be related objectively to an event occurring after the impairment was recognized, the previously recognized impairment loss is reversed through profit or loss to the extent that the carrying amount of the investment at the date the impairment is reversed does not exceed what the amortized cost would have been had the impairment not been recognized. In respect of AFS equity securities, impairment losses previously recognized through profit or loss are not reversed through profit or loss. Any increase in fair value subsequent to an impairment loss is recognized directly in equity.

When an AFS financial asset is considered to be impaired, cumulative gains or losses previously recognized in other comprehensive income are reclassified to profit or loss in the reporting period.

Derivative financial assets and liabilities:

The Group has no derivative financial assets or liabilities.

Exploration and Evaluation Expenditure

(f) Exploration and Evaluation Expenditure

Exploration and evaluation expenditures include the costs of acquiring licenses, costs associated with exploration and evaluation activity, and the acquisition date fair value of exploration and evaluation assets acquired in a business combination or an asset acquisition. Exploration and evaluation expenditures are expensed as incurred except for expenditures associated with the acquisition of exploration and evaluation assets through a business combination or an asset acquisition. Costs incurred before the Group has obtained the legal rights to explore an area are expensed.

Acquisition costs, including general and administrative costs, are only capitalized to the extent that these costs can be related directly to operational activities in the relevant area of interest where it is considered likely to be recoverable by future exploitation or sale or where the activities have not reached a stage which permits a reasonable assessment of the existence of reserves.

Exploration and evaluation (“E&E”) assets are assessed for impairment only when facts and circumstances suggest that the carrying amount of an E&E asset may exceed its recoverable amount and when the Group has sufficient information to reach a conclusion about technical feasibility and commercial viability.

Industry-specific indicators for an impairment review arise typically when one of the following circumstances applies:

● Substantive expenditure on further exploration and evaluation activities is neither budgeted nor planned;

● title to the asset is compromised;

● adverse changes in the taxation and regulatory environment;

● adverse changes in variations in commodity prices and markets; and

● variations in the exchange rate for the currency of operation.

Once the technical feasibility and commercial viability of the extraction of mineral resources in an area of interest are demonstrable, exploration and evaluation assets attributable to that area of interest are first tested for impairment and then reclassified to mining property and development assets within property, plant and equipment.

Recoverability of the carrying amount of any exploration and evaluation assets is dependent on successful development and commercial exploitation, or alternatively, sale of the respective assets.

Mineral property, plant and equipment

(g) Mineral property, plant and equipment

Mineral property, plant and equipment are carried at cost, less accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses.

The cost of mineral property, plant and equipment consists of the acquisition costs transferred from E&E assets, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, including costs to further delineate the ore body, development and construction costs, removal of overburden to initially expose the ore body, an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling, removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located and, if applicable, borrowing costs.

Mineral property acquisition and development costs are not currently depreciated as the Pebble Project is still in the development stage and no saleable minerals are being produced.

The cost of an item of plant and equipment consists of the purchase price, any costs directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for its intended use, and an initial estimate of the costs of dismantling and removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located.

Depreciation is provided at rates calculated to write off the cost of plant and equipment, less their estimated residual value, using the declining balance method at various rates ranging from 20% to 30% per annum.

An item of equipment is derecognized upon disposal or when no future economic benefits are expected to arise from the continued use of the asset. Any gain or loss arising on disposal of the asset, determined as the difference between the net disposal proceeds and the carrying amount of the asset, is recognized in profit or loss.

Where an item of equipment consists of major components with different useful lives, the components are accounted for as separate items of equipment. Expenditures incurred to replace a component of an item of equipment that is accounted for separately, including major inspection and overhaul expenditures, are capitalized.

Residual values and estimated useful lives are reviewed at least annually.

Impairment of Non-Financial Assets

(h) Impairment of Non-Financial Assets

At the end of each reporting period the carrying amounts of the Group’s non-financial assets are reviewed to determine whether there is any indication that these assets are impaired. If any such indication exists, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated in order to determine the extent of the impairment loss, if any. Where it is not possible to estimate the recoverable amount of an individual asset, the Group estimates the recoverable amount of the cash-generating unit to which the asset belongs. The recoverable amount is the higher of fair value less costs to sell and value in use. Fair value is determined as the amount that would be obtained from the sale of the asset in an arm’s length transaction between knowledgeable and willing parties. In assessing value in use, the estimated future cash flows are discounted to their present value using a pre-tax discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the asset. If the recoverable amount of an asset is estimated to be less than its carrying amount, the carrying amount of the asset is reduced to its recoverable amount and the impairment loss is recognized in profit or loss for the period. For an asset that does not generate largely independent cash inflows, the recoverable amount is determined for the cash generating unit to which the asset belongs.

Where an impairment loss subsequently reverses, the carrying amount of the asset (or cash-generating unit) is increased to the revised estimate of its recoverable amount. This increase in the carrying amount is limited to the carrying amount that would have been determined had no impairment loss been recognized for the asset (or cash-generating unit) in prior years. A reversal of an impairment loss is recognized immediately in profit or loss. The Group has not recorded any impairment charges in the years presented.

Share Capital, Special Warrants and Warrants

(i) Share Capital, Special Warrants and Warrants

Common shares, special warrants and warrants (notes 7(b)-(c)) are classified as equity. Transaction costs directly attributable to the issue of common shares, share purchase options, special warrants and warrants are recognized as a deduction from equity, net of any tax effects. Where units comprising of common shares and warrants are issued (note 7(b)), the proceeds and any transaction costs are apportioned between the common shares and warrants according to their relative fair values.

Upon conversion of special warrants and warrants into common shares, the carrying amount, net of a pro rata share of the transaction costs, is transferred to common share capital.

Share-based Payment Transactions

(j) Share-based Payment Transactions

Equity-settled share-based Option Plan

The Group operates an equity-settled share-based option plan for its employees and service providers (note 7(d)). The fair value of share purchase options granted is recognized as an employee or consultant expense with a corresponding increase in the equity-settled share-based payments reserve in equity (the “Equity Reserve”). An individual is classified as an employee when the individual is an employee for legal or tax purposes (“direct employee”) or provides services similar to those performed by a direct employee.

The fair value is measured at grant date for each tranche, which is expensed on a straight line basis over the vesting period, with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve. The fair value of share purchase options granted is measured using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, taking into account the terms and conditions upon which the share purchase options were granted and forfeiture rates as appropriate. At the end of each reporting period, the amount recognized as an expense is adjusted to reflect the actual number of share purchase options that are expected to vest.

Deferred Share Unit (“DSU”) Plan

The Group has a DSU plan for its non-executive directors. The Group determines whether to account for DSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of DSUs granted is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity-settled or a liability is raised if cash-settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at grant date and expensed over the vesting period as share-based compensation in the statement of loss and comprehensive loss until they are fully vested. If the DSUs are cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the TSX quoted market price of the Company’s common shares.

Restricted Share Unit (“RSU”) Plan

The Group has a RSU plan for its employees, executive directors and eligible consultants of the Group. The Group determines whether to account for the RSUs as equity-settled or cash-settled based on the terms of the contractual arrangement. The fair value of RSUs is recognized as an employee expense with a corresponding increase in the Equity Reserve if deemed equity –settled or a liability is raised if cash settled at grant date.

The fair value is estimated using the number of RSUs and the quoted market price of the Company’s common shares at the grant date. It is then expensed over the vesting period with the credit recognized in equity in the Equity Reserve. If cash-settled, the expense and liability are adjusted each reporting period for changes in the quoted market value of the Company’s common shares.

Income Taxes

(k) Income Taxes

Income tax on the profit or loss for the years presented comprises current and deferred tax. Income tax is recognized in profit or loss except to the extent that it relates to items recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or directly in equity, in which case it is recognized in other comprehensive income or loss or equity.

Current tax expense is the expected tax payable on the taxable income for the year, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at year end, adjusted for amendments to tax payable with regard to previous years.

Deferred tax is provided using the balance sheet liability method, providing for unused tax loss carry forwards and temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for taxation purposes. The following temporary differences are not provided for: goodwill not deductible for tax purposes; the initial recognition of assets or liabilities that affect neither accounting nor taxable profit; and differences relating to investments in subsidiaries, associates, and joint ventures to the extent that they will probably not reverse in the foreseeable future. The amount of deferred tax provided is based on the expected manner of realization or settlement of the carrying amount of assets and liabilities, using tax rates enacted or substantively enacted at the end of the reporting period applicable to the period of expected realization or settlement.

A deferred tax asset is recognized only to the extent that it is probable that future taxable profits will be available against which the asset can be utilized.

Additional income taxes that arise from the distribution of dividends are recognized at the same time as the liability to pay the related dividend.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are offset when there is a legally enforceable right to set off current tax assets against current tax liabilities and when they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation authority and the Group intends to settle its current tax assets and liabilities on a net basis.

Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Environmental Obligations

(l) Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Environmental Obligations

An obligation to incur restoration, rehabilitation and environmental costs arises when environmental disturbance is caused by the exploration or development of a mineral property interest. Such costs arising from the decommissioning of plant and other site preparation work, discounted to their net present value, are provided for and capitalized at the start of each project to the carrying amount of the asset, along with a corresponding liability as soon as the obligation to incur such costs arises. The timing of the actual rehabilitation expenditure is dependent on a number of factors such as the life and nature of the asset, the operating license conditions and, when applicable, the environment in which the mine operates.

Discount rates using a pre-tax rate that reflects the time value of money are used to calculate the net present value. These costs are charged against profit or loss over the economic life of the related asset, through amortization using either the unit-of-production or the straight line method. The corresponding liability is progressively increased as the effect of discounting unwinds, creating an expense recognized in profit or loss.

Decommissioning costs are also adjusted for changes in estimates. Those adjustments are accounted for as a change in the corresponding capitalized cost, except where a reduction in costs is greater than the unamortized capitalized cost of the related assets, in which case the capitalized cost is reduced to nil and the remaining adjustment is recognized in profit or loss.

The operations of the Group have been, and may in the future be, affected from time to time in varying degree by changes in environmental regulations, including those for site restoration costs. Both the likelihood of new regulations and their overall effect upon the Group are not predictable.

The Group has no material restoration, rehabilitation and environmental obligations as the disturbance to date is immaterial. As a condition for the issue of the Miscellaneous Land Use Permit at the Pebble Project, the Pebble Partnership has posted a bond with the Alaskan regulatory authorities as performance guarantee for any potential reclamation liability (note 6(b)).

Loss Per Share

(m) Loss per Share

The Group presents basic and diluted loss per share information for its common shares, calculated by dividing the loss attributable to common shareholders of the Group by the weighted average number of common shares and any fully prepaid special warrants outstanding during the year. Diluted loss per share does not adjust the loss attributable to common shareholders or the weighted average number of common shares outstanding when the effect is anti-dilutive.

Segment Reporting

(n) Segment Reporting

The Group operates in a single reportable operating segment – the acquisition, exploration and development of mineral properties. The Group’s core asset, the Pebble Project, is located in Alaska, USA.

Significant Accounting Estimates and Judgments

(o) Significant Accounting Estimates and Judgments

The preparation of these Financial Statements requires management to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the Financial Statements and reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. Actual outcomes could differ from these estimates. These Financial Statements include estimates which, by their nature, are uncertain. The impacts of such estimates are pervasive throughout the Financial Statements, and may require accounting adjustments based on future occurrences. Revisions to accounting estimates are recognized in the period in which the estimate is revised and future periods if the revision affects both current and future periods. These estimates are based on historical experience, current and future economic conditions and other factors, including expectations of future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Sources of estimation uncertainty

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty that management has made at the end of the reporting period, that could result in a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities, in the event that actual results differ from assumptions made, relate to, but are not limited to, the following:

1.

The Group uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to calculate the fair value of share purchase options granted for determining share-based compensation included in the loss for the year. Inputs used in this model require subjective assumptions, including the expected price volatility from three to five years. Changes in the subjective input assumptions can affect the fair value estimate. The weighted average assumptions applied are disclosed in note 7(d).

2.

Significant assumptions about the future and other sources of estimation uncertainty are made in determining the provision for any deferred income tax expense included in the loss for the year and the composition of any deferred income tax liabilities included in the Statement of Financial Position.

Critical accounting judgments

These include:

1.	In terms of IFRS 6, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources, management determined that there were no circumstance and facts that indicated that testing the Group’s mineral property interest (“MPI”) for impairment was necessary.
2.	Pursuant to IAS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates (“IAS 21”) in determining the functional currency of the parent and its subsidiaries, the Group used judgment in identifying the currency in which financing activities are denominated and the currency that mainly influences the cost of undertaking the business activities in each jurisdiction in which each entity operates.
3.	The Group has employed judgement that going concern was an appropriate basis for the preparation of the Financial Statements, as the Group considered existing and future available financial resources in determining that such financial resources are able to meet key corporate and Pebble Project expenditure requirements for at least the next twelve months (note 1).
4.	The Group employed judgment in the accounting for the non-refundable early option price installment received by the Group pursuant to the framework agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (note 3) as a non-current liability at the reporting date as no interest in the Pebble Partnership had been acquired or an option agreement to acquire an interest had been entered into.

Amendments, Interpretations, Revised and New Standards Adopted by the Group

(p) Amendments, Interpretations, Revised and New Standards Adopted by the Group

The Group adopted the following amendments and annual improvements that became effective January 1, 2017:

● Amendments to IAS 7, Statement of Cash Flows – Disclosure Initiative

● Amendments to IAS 12, Income Taxes – Recognition of Deferred Tax Assets for Unrealised Losses

● Annual improvements to IFRS 2014 – 2016 Cycle – Amendments to IFRS 12, Disclosure of Interests in Other Entities

The amendments and annual improvements had no material effect on the Financial Statements.

Early adoption

● Amendments to IFRS 2, Share-based Payment (“IFRS 2”) – Classification and Measurement of Share-based Payment Transactions

The amendments to IFRS 2 clarify: a) the accounting for cash-settled share-based payment transactions that include a performance condition and include accounting requirements; b) the classification of share based payment transactions with net settlement features. This amendment provides for an exception for a share-based payment arrangement that is settled on a net basis to be classified as equity-settled in its entirety provided the share-based payment would have been classified as equity-settled had it not included the net settlement feature; and c) the accounting for modifications of share-based payment transactions from cash-settled to equity-settled. The amendments are effective for annual periods on or after January 1, 2018 with early application permitted.

The Group has early adopted these amendments and accordingly has classified share-based compensation with a net settlement feature as equity-settled and measured it accordingly (note 7(f)).

Accounting Standards, Amendments and Revised Standards Not Yet Effective

(q) Accounting Standards, Amendments and Revised Standards Not Yet Effective

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2018

● IFRS 9, Financial Instruments (“IFRS 9”)

IFRS 9 replaces IAS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement, in its entirety. The standard incorporates a number of improvements: a) includes a logical model for classification and measurement (IFRS 9 provides for principle-based approach to classification which is driven by cash flow characteristics and the business model in which an asset is held); b) includes a single, forward-looking “expected loss” impairment model (IFRS 9 will require entities to account for expected credit losses from when financial instruments are first recognized and to recognize full lifetime expected losses on a timely basis); and c) includes a substantially-reformed model for hedge accounting with enhanced disclosures about risk management activity (IFRS 9’s new model aligns the accounting treatment with risk management activities). The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 9 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements given the extent of its current use of financial instruments.

● IFRS 15, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“IFRS 15”)

IFRS 15 supersedes IAS 11, Construction Contracts, IAS 18, Revenue, IFRIC 13, Customer Loyalty Programmes, IFRIC 15, Agreements for the Construction of Real Estate, IFRIC 18, Transfers of Assets from Customers and SIC 31, Revenue – Barter Transactions Involving Advertising Services. IFRS 15 establishes a single five-step model framework for determining the nature, amount, timing and certainty of revenue and cash flows arising from a contract with a customer. The standard permits early adoption.

The Group will adopt IFRS 15 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will have no material impact on its financial statements as the Group does not generate significant revenue given the Group’s current stage of development of the Pebble Project. The Group will reassess the impact once significant revenue is generated.

Effective for annual periods commencing on or after January 1, 2019

● IFRS 16, Leases (“IFRS 16”).

The IASB issued IFRS 16 and revised IAS 17 in January 2016. IFRS 16 specifies how to recognize, measure, present and disclose leases. IFRS 16 provides a single lessee accounting model, requiring the recognition of assets and liabilities for all leases, unless the term of the lease is twelve months or less or the underlying asset has a low value. Lessor accounting however remains unchanged from IAS 17 and the distinction between operating and finance leases is retained. IFRS 16 now prescribes the accounting policies and disclosures applicable to leases, both for lessees and lessors.

The Group will adopt IFRS 16 at the effective date and anticipates that the adoption will not have a significant impact other than the accounting for office, accommodation and storage leases the Group may have entered into where the minimum lease term is more than 12 months.

XML

Significant Accounting Policies (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Significant Accounting Policies

Schedule of Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements

These Financial Statements incorporate the financial statements of the Company, the Company’s subsidiaries, and entities controlled by the Company and its subsidiaries listed below:

Name of Subsidiary	Place of Incorporation	Principal Activity	Ownership
3537137 Canada Inc. 1	Canada	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Pebble Services Inc.	Nevada, USA	Management and services company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Northern Dynasty Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holds 99.9% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership and 100% of Pebble Mines Corp.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Limited Partnership	Alaska, USA	Holding Company and Exploration of the Pebble Project.	100% (indirect)
Pebble Mines Corp.	Delaware, USA	General Partner. Holds 0.1% interest in the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble West Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
Pebble East Claims Corporation 2	Alaska, USA	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.	100% (indirect)
U5 Resources Inc. 3	Nevada, USA	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Cannon Point Resources Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
MGL Subco Ltd.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.	100%
Delta Minerals Inc.	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of MGL Subco Ltd.	100% (indirect)
Imperial Gold Corporation	British Columbia, Canada	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Minerals Inc.	100% (indirect)
Yuma Gold Inc.	Nevada, USA	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Imperial Gold Corporation.	100% (indirect)

Notes:

1.	Holds 20% interest in the Northern Dynasty Partnership. The Company holds the remaining 80% interest.
2.	Both entities together hold 2,182 claims of the Pebble Project.
3.	Holds 220 claims of the Pebble Project. Subsequent to the reporting date, these claims were sold to Pebble West Claims Corporation.

XML

Mineral Property, Plant and Equipment (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Property, plant and equipment [abstract]

Schedule of Exploration and Evaluation of Assets

The Group’s exploration and evaluation assets are comprised of the following:

Year ended December 31, 2017	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	881		$	113,422
Additions		–		473			473
Ending balance		112,541		1,354			113,895
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Depreciation 2		–		(176	)		(176	)
Ending balance		–		(734	)		(734	)
Foreign currency translation difference		20,361		189			20,550
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	132,902	$	809		$	133,711

Year ended December 31, 2016	Mineral Property interest 1		Plant and equipment			Total
Cost
Beginning balance	$	112,541	$	1,032		$	113,573
Dispositions		–		(151	)		(151	)
Ending balance		112,541		881			113,422
Accumulated depreciation
Beginning balance		–		(481	)		(481	)
Depreciation 2		–		(205	)		(205	)
Eliminated on disposal		–		128			128
Ending balance		–		(558	)		(558	)
Foreign currency translation difference		29,381		227			29,608
Net carrying value – Ending balance	$	141,922	$	550		$	142,472

Notes to tables:

1.	Comprises the Pebble Project, a contiguous block of 2,402 mineral claims covering approximately 417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.
2.	Depreciation is included in exploration and evaluation expenses.

XML

Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Amounts Receivable And Prepaid Expenses

Schedule of Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Sales tax receivable	$	96	$	50
Amounts receivable		487		138
Prepaid expenses		411		491
Total	$	994	$	679

XML

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Cash and cash equivalents [abstract]

Schedule of Cash and Cash Equivalents

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Business and savings accounts 1	$	62,830	$	7,196
Guaranteed Investment Certificates		4,328		–
Total	$	67,158	$	7,196

Note:

1. $47,149 of this amount relates to the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment of US$37,500 received which is to be used solely for progressing permitting at the Pebble Project (note 3).

XML

Capital and Reserves (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Capital commitments [abstract]

Schedule of Share Purchase Warrants and Options Not Issued Under the Group’s Incentive Plan

The following tables reconciles warrants and non-employee options (options which are not issued under the Group’s incentive plan (note 7(d)), each exercisable to acquire one common share, for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 respectively:

			Year ended December 31, 2017
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date		Beginning Balance		Issued		Exercised			Expired			Ending Balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.37		July 23, 2017		18,800		–		(18,800	)		–			–
0.37		June 30, 2019		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.40		June 30, 2019		148,050		–		(100,000	)		–			48,050
0.37		March 10, 2021		9,400		–		–			–			9,400
0.40		March 10, 2021		82,250		–		–			–			82,250
0.37		December 15, 2021		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
0.40		December 12, 2022		56,400		–		–			–			56,400
0.29		December 8, 2024		37,600		–		–			–			37,600
Total				446,500		–		(118,800	)		–			327,700
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55		July 9, 2020		11,288,698		–		(4,163,052	)		–			7,125,646
3.00		September 14, 2017		2,871,676		–		(8,952	)		(2,862,724	)		–
Total				14,160,374		–		(4,172,004	)		(2,862,724	)		7,125,646
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65		June 10, 2021		39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Total				39,396,410		–		(11,538,197	)		–			27,858,213
Grand Total				54,003,284		–		(15,829,001	)		(2,862,724	)		35,311,559

		Year ended December 31, 2016
Exercise price ($)	Expiry date	Beginning balance	Issued	Exercised	Expired	Ending balance
Options issued pursuant to acquisition of Cannon Point 1
0.29	January 29, 2016	150,400	–	(150,400)	–	–
0.37	January 29, 2016	220,900	–	(61,100)	(159,800)	–
0.40	January 29, 2016	150,400	–	–	(150,400)	–
0.43	January 29, 2016	37,600	–	–	(37,600)	–
0.37	July 23, 2017	18,800	–	–	–	18,800
0.37	June 30, 2019	56,400	–	–	–	56,400
0.40	June 30, 2019	225,600	–	(77,550)2	–	148,050
0.37	March 10, 2021	9,400	–	–	–	9,400
0.40	March 10, 2021	150,400	–	(68,150)2	–	82,250
0.37	December 15, 2021	37,600	–	–	–	37,600
0.40	December 12, 2022	75,200	–	(18,800)	–	56,400
0.29	December 8, 2024	37,600	–	–	–	37,600
Total		1,170,300	–	(376,000)	(347,800)	446,500
Warrants issued pursuant to acquisition of Mission Gold 1
0.55	July 9, 2020	13,801,672	–	(2,512,974)	–	11,288,698
3.00	September 14, 2017	2,871,676	–	–	–	2,871,676
Total		16,673,348	–	(2,512,974)	–	14,160,374
Warrants issued pursuant to financings 3
0.65	June 10, 2021	–	42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Total		–	42,444,376	(3,047,966)	–	39,396,410
Grand Total		17,843,648	42,444,376	(5,936,940)	(347,800)	54,003,284

Notes to tables:

1.	Pursuant to the acquisition of Cannon Point Resources Ltd. (“Cannon Point”) and Mission Gold Ltd. (“Mission Gold”) in October 2015 and December 2015 respectively, the Group exchanged options and warrants outstanding in these companies for options and warrants to purchase shares in the Company.
2.	The numbers have been revised to correct a disclosure error in 2016 as 56,400 options exercised were incorrectly allocated to options with an expiry of June 30, 2019 instead of options with an expiry of March 10, 2021. There was no impact on loss and loss per share.
3.	Refer to the 2016 prospectus and private placement financings in Note 7(b).

Summary of Options Outstanding

The following summarizes the Group’s options outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of options	Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Number of options			Weighted average exercise price ($/option)
Beginning balance		15,861,131			0.92		9,755,600			1.27
Granted		5,808,000			1.75		6,806,000			0.49
Expired		(508,100	)		2.88		(27,000	)		15.44
Exercised		(1,277,200	)		1.38		(548,869	)		0.92
Forfeited		(36,400	)		0.89		(38,000	)		0.50
Cancelled		–			–		(86,600	)		1.40
Ending balance		19,847,431			1.08		15,861,131			0.92

Schedule of Fair Value Assumptions Using Black Scholes Option Pricing

For options granted in the year ended December 31, 2017, the weighted average fair value was estimated at $1.19 (2016 – $0.46) per option and was based on the Black-Scholes option pricing model using the following weighted average assumptions:

Assumptions	2017		2016
Risk-free interest rate		1.54%		0.54%
Expected life		4.51 years		4.73 years
Expected volatility 1		93.82%		82.89%
Grant date share price		$1.74		$0.67
Expected dividend yield		Nil		Nil

Note:

1. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s closing share price on the TSX.

Schedule of Options Exercised

Details of options exercised during each year were as follows:

Year ended December 31, 2017
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
January 2017		502,200		1.60		3.70
February 2017		484,000		1.65		3.15
April 2017		15,000		0.89		2.03
May 2017		223,000		0.51		2.40
July 2017		10,000		0.50		1.78
September 2017		3,000		0.50		2.28
November 2017		40,000		0.50		2.56
		1,277,200		1.38		3.19

Year ended December 31, 2016
Month	Number of options		Weighted average exercise price ($/option)		Weighted average market share price on exercise ($/option)
August 2016		10,000		0.49		0.96
September 2016		46,667		0.50		1.00
October 2016		60,000		0.50		0.97
November 2016		271,668		1.20		1.56
December 2016		160,534		0.74		2.44
		548,869		0.92		1.70

Schedule of Options Outstanding and Exercisable

The following tables summarize information about the Group’s options as at December 31, 2017 and 2016:

Options outstanding	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		600,000		4.21
0.49		6,058,000		3.26		6,147,000		4.25
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		3,266,831		3.23
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,125,000		1.29		1,180,500		2.20
1.75		5,796,600		4.09		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		19,847,431		2.89		15,861,131		3.11

Options exercisable	2017				2016
Exercise prices ($)	Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)		Number of options exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)
0.48		450,000		3.21		200,000		4.21
0.49		4,001,340		3.26		2,009,670		4.28
0.50		3,107,831		2.30		2,074,676		3.27
0.72		200,000		1.71		200,000		2.71
0.89		1,099,998		1.29		1,113,498		2.22
1.75		1,936,000		4.08		–		–
1.77		3,110,000		1.16		3,991,800		1.71
3.00		–		–		475,000		0.49
		13,905,169		2.51		10,064,644		2.61

Schedule of Restricted Share Units Outstanding

The following summarizes the Group’s RSUs outstanding at the beginning and end of the year:

	2017					2016
Continuity of RSUs	Number of RSUs			Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)		Number of RSUs		Weighted average fair value ($/RSU)
Beginning Balance		639,031			0.69		–		–
Granted 2, 3		542,371			2.24		639,031		0.69
Cash-settled 1		(639,031	)		0.69		–		–
Withheld 3		(13,782	)		2.23		–		–
Shares issued 3		(22,094	)		2.23		–		–
Ending Balance		506,495			2.24		639,031		0.69

Notes

1.	On July 11, 2017, 639,031 RSUs granted to the Group’s Board Chair, Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”) vested. The Group settled the equity obligation by making a cash payment of $1,098 based on the 5 day average of TSX closing prices for the Company’s common shares up to July 11, 2017 of $1.72 per RSU pursuant to the terms of the RSU Plan. This payment has been recognized as a decrease in the equity-settled share-based compensation reserve in equity (“SBC Reserve”). In the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $232 (2016 – $209) as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve.
2.	On July 27, 2017, the Group’s Compensation Committee approved a 2016 executive short term incentive bonus/compensation of $951 to the Group’s Board Chair, CEO and CFO payable through a combination of cash and RSUs. Of the total compensation, $190 was paid in cash with the balance paid by the grant of 434,742 RSUs. The RSUs have a one year term and vest on July 28, 2018. The Group has determined that this grant should be accounted for as cash-settled given the cash settlement of the previous grant to the same individuals (see 1 above). Accordingly, during the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $419 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in a RSU liability for this grant based on the TSX closing price of the Company’s common shares as of the reporting date. At the end of each reporting period, until the RSU liability is settled, the RSU liability’s fair value is remeasured based on the TSX closing price for common shares multiplied by the number of RSUs that will vest and be converted into common shares, and amortized over the vesting period of the RSUs, with any change in fair value charged to share-based compensation.
3.	On September 15, 2017, the Group granted 107,629 RSUs to the CEO of the Pebble Limited Partnership ("PLP CEO") with the following vesting terms: 1/3 vested on grant date; 1/3 vest 1 year from grant date; and 1/3 vest 2 years from grant date. The RSU terms also stipulate that settlement is to be paid out in common shares and the RSUs have a net settlement feature for withholding tax obligations. The Group has treated these RSUs in their entirety as equity-settled as a result of early adopting the amendments to IFRS 2 (note 2(p)). The fair value of the RSUs granted was $240 based on the TSX closing price for the Company’s shares at date of grant. With the first tranche of 35,876 RSUs that vested on date of grant, 13,782 RSUs were withheld to settle and pay the PLP CEO’s tax obligations of $30 and the balance of 22,094 RSUs were issued to the PLP CEO as common shares. The Group has recognized $115 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve during the year ended December 31, 2017.

Schedule of Foreign Currency Translation Reserve

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Beginning balance	$	36,233		$	40,479
Foreign exchange translation differences incurred:
Loss on translation of foreign subsidiaries		(8,299	)		(4,246	)
Ending balance	$	27,934		$	36,233

XML

Related Party Balances and Transactions (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Statement Line Items [Line Items]

Schedule of Related Party Balances and Transactions

The components of transactions to related parties is as follows:

	December 31		December 31
	2017		2016
Payables to related parties
Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (b)	$	540	$	240
Key management personnel (a)		93		–
RSU liability (a)		419		–
	$	1,052	$	240

Key Management Personnel [Member]

Statement Line Items [Line Items]

Schedule of Outstanding Balances

Transactions	2017		2016 5
Compensation
Amounts paid and payable to HDSI for services of KMP employed by HDSI 1	$	3,306	$	2,274
Amounts paid and payable to KMP 2		2,438		2,262
Bonuses paid to KMP 3		1,660		–
		7,404		4,536
Share-based compensation 4		4,650		2,428
Total compensation	$	12,054	$	6,964

Notes to previous table:

1.	The Group’s CEO, CFO, Board Chair and senior management, other than disclosed in 2 below, are employed by the Group through Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (“HDSI”) (refer (b)).
2.	Represents short term employee benefits, including salaries and director’s fees paid and payable to the Group’s independent directors, PLP CEO, PMC Chair and PLP EVP, SVP and VP.
3.	Performance bonuses were paid to the PLP CEO for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years, incentive bonuses were paid or payable to the SVP, Corporate Development, VP, Engineering (payable to HDSI) and the PLP VP Permitting. In addition, the Group’s CEO and CFO were paid an incentive bonus/compensation for 2016.
4.	Includes cost of DSUs, RSUs and share purchase options issued during the period.
5.	In the year ended December 31, 2016, the amounts paid and payable to KMP have been revised to correct for a non-material disclosure omission. This omission had no effect on the Statement of Loss and Comprehensive Loss and loss and diluted loss per share.

Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. [Member]

Statement Line Items [Line Items]

Schedule of Outstanding Balances

For the year ended December 31, 2017, and 2016, the aggregate value of transactions were as follows:

Transactions	2017		2016
Services rendered by HDSI:	$	5,219	$	3,584
Technical		2,329		1,157
Engineering		741		83
Environmental		736		375
Socioeconomic		699		660
Other technical services		153		39
General and administrative		2,890		2,427
Management, corporate communications, secretarial, financial and administration		2,225		1,908
Shareholder communication		665		519
Reimbursement of third party expenses		658		499
Conferences and travel		309		175
Insurance		62		54
Office supplies and information technology		287		270
Total value of transactions	$	5,877	$	4,083

XML

Trade and Other Payables (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Trade and other payables [abstract]

Schedule of Trade and Other Payables

	December 31		December 31
Falling due within the year	2017		2016
Trade 1	$	10,268	$	1,260
Total	$	10,268	$	1,260
Non-current liabilities
Trade 1	$	6,650	$	-
Total	$	6,650	$	-

Notes:

1. Legal fees

XML

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Profit or loss [abstract]

Schedule of Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share

The calculation of basic and diluted loss per share was based on the following for the year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016:

	2017		2016
Loss attributable to common shareholders	$	64,865	$	26,982
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding (000s)		300,511		246,161

XML

Income Tax Expense (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details

Schedule of Current and Deferred Expenses

		Year ended December 31
		2017		2016
Current tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Current income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense
Current year (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense	$	–	$	–

Schedule of Reconciliation of Effective Tax Rate

	Year ended December 31
Reconciliation of effective tax rate	2017			2016
Net loss	$	(64,865	)	$	(26,982	)
Total income tax (recovery) expense		–			–
Loss excluding income tax		(64,865	)		(26,982	)
Income tax using the Company’s domestic tax rate		(16,865	)		(7,015	)
Non-deductible expenses and other		(1,914	)		512
Change in tax rates		(2,950	)		–
Deferred income tax assets not recognized		21,729			6,503
	$	–		$	–

Schedule of Deferred Income Tax Assets (Liabilities)

The Company’s domestic tax rate for the year was 26% (2016 – 26%).

	December 31			December 31
Deferred income tax assets (liabilities)	2017			2016
Tax losses	$	2,617		$	3,214
Net deferred income tax assets		2,617			3,214
Resource property/investment in Pebble Partnership		(2,472	)		(3,191	)
Equipment		(145	)		(23	)
Net deferred income tax liability	$	–		$	–

Schedule of Taxable Temporary Differences On Investments

The Group had the following temporary differences at December 31, 2017 in respect of which no deferred tax asset has been recognized:

			Resource
Expiry	Tax losses		pools		Other
Within one year	$	–	$	–	$	–
One to five years		–		–		4,795
After five years		129,239		–		–
No expiry date		78		101,303		196
Total	$	129,317	$	101,303	$	4,991

XML

Financial Risk Management (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Financial Risk Management

Schedule of Financial Assets and Liabilities

The following is the Group’s maximum exposure:

	December 31		December 31
Exposure	2017		2016
Amounts receivable	$	487	$	138
Restricted cash		757		–
Cash and cash equivalents		67,158		7,196
Total exposure	$	68,402	$	7,334

The exposure of the Group’s US dollar- denominated financial assets and liabilities to foreign exchange risk is as follows:

	December 31			December 31
	2017			2016
Financial assets:
Amounts receivable	$	552		$	326
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash		60,083			2,232
		60,635			2,558
Financial liabilities: Trade and other payables		(16,845	)		(652	)
Net financial (liabilities) assets exposed to foreign currency risk	$	(43,790	)	$	1,906

XML

Commitments and Contingencies (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2017

Capital commitments [abstract]

Schedule of Maturity of Leases

The Group has the following commitments as of December 31, 2017:

	Less than   1 Year		Between 1  and   5 years		Later than 5 years		Total
Anchorage office lease 1	US$	179	US$	765	US$	–	US$	944
Pebble Project site leases 2		115		–		–		115
Total	US$	294	US$	765	US$	–	US$	1,059
Total in Canadian dollars 3	$	370	$	961	$	–	$	1,331

Notes:

1.	Lease which expires November 30, 2022.
2.	The Group has leases for a hangar at site and core storage. The hanger lease expires May 1, 2018 and the core yard lease expires June 1, 2018.
3.	Converted at the Wall Street Journal closing rate of $1.2573 per US$1 on December 31, 2017.

XML

Nature and Continuance of Operations (Details Narrative) $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($)	Dec. 31, 2017 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2016 CAD ($)	Dec. 31, 2015 CAD ($)
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Aggregate proceeds from issuance of shares and warrants	$ 49,067
Proceeds from exercise of share purchase options and warrants	11,620
Proceeds from early option price installment	48,308
Cash and cash equivalents	67,158		$ 7,196	$ 7,509
Net loss	64,865		26,982
Retained earnings deficit	$ (470,971)		$ (406,106)
U.S. $ [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Aggregate proceeds from issuance of shares and warrants		$ 37,440
Proceeds from early option price installment		$ 37,500

XML

Significant Accounting Policies (Details Narrative)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 Segments
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Reporting segments	1
Minimum [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Percentage on write off cost of plant and equipment	20.00%
Maximum [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Percentage on write off cost of plant and equipment	30.00%

XML

Significant Accounting Policies - Schedule of Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements (Details)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Ownership	50.00%
Canada Inc [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	3537137 Canada Inc.	[1]
Place of Incorporation	Canada
Principal Activity	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Ownership	100.00%
Pebble Services Inc. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Pebble Services Inc.
Place of Incorporation	Nevada, USA
Principal Activity	Management and services company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Ownership	100.00%
Northern Dynasty Partnership [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Northern Dynasty Partnership
Place of Incorporation	Alaska, USA
Principal Activity	Holds 99.9% of the Pebble Limited Partnership and 100% of Pebble Mines Corp.
Ownership	100.00%
Pebble Limited Partnership [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Pebble Limited Partnership
Place of Incorporation	Alaska, USA
Principal Activity	Holding Company and Exploration of the Pebble Project.
Ownership	100.00%
Pebble Mines Corp. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Pebble Mines Corp.
Place of Incorporation	Delaware, USA
Principal Activity	General Partner. Holds 0.1% of Pebble Limited Partnership.
Ownership	100.00%
Pebble West Claims Corporation [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Pebble West Claims Corporation	[2]
Place of Incorporation	Alaska, USA
Principal Activity	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.
Ownership	100.00%
Pebble East Claims Corporation [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Pebble East Claims Corporation	[2]
Place of Incorporation	Alaska, USA
Principal Activity	Holding Company. Subsidiary of the Pebble Limited Partnership.
Ownership	100.00%
U5 Resources Inc. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	U5 Resources Inc.	[3]
Place of Incorporation	Nevada, USA
Principal Activity	Holding Company. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Ownership	100.00%
Cannon Point Resources Ltd. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Cannon Point Resources Ltd.
Place of Incorporation	British Columbia, Canada
Principal Activity	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Ownership	100.00%
MGL Subco Ltd. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	MGL Subco Ltd.
Place of Incorporation	British Columbia, Canada
Principal Activity	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Ownership	100.00%
Delta Minerals Inc. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Delta Minerals Inc.
Place of Incorporation	British Columbia, Canada
Principal Activity	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of MGL Subco Ltd.
Ownership	100.00%
Imperial Gold Corporation [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Imperial Gold Corporation
Place of Incorporation	British Columbia, Canada
Principal Activity	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Delta Minerals Inc.
Ownership	100.00%
Yuma Gold Inc. [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Name of Subsidiary	Yuma Gold Inc.
Place of Incorporation	Nevada, USA
Principal Activity	Not active. Wholly-owned subsidiary of Imperial Gold Corporation.
Ownership	100.00%

[1] Holds 20% interest in the Northern Dynasty Partnership. The Company holds the remaining 80% interest.

[2] Both entities together hold 2,182 claims of the Pebble Project.

[3] Holds 220 claims of the Pebble Project. Subsequent to the reporting date, these claims were sold to Pebble West Claims Corporation.

XML

Significant Accounting Policies - Schedule of Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements (Details) (Parenthetical)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 Integer
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Ownership percentage	50.00%
Pebble Project [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Number of mineral claims (pebble west claims corporation & pebble east claims corporation)	2,182
Number of mineral claims	220
Canada Inc [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Ownership percentage	100.00%
Canada Inc [Member] | Northern Dynasty Partnership [Member]
SignificantAccountingPracticesLineItems [Line Items]
Ownership percentage	20.00%
Remaining ownership interest percentage	80.00%

XML

Framework Agreement with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (Details Narrative) - 12 months ended Dec. 31, 2017 $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands	CAD ($)	USD ($)
FrameworkAgreementWithACompanyLineItems [Line Items]
Ownership interest	50.00%	50.00%
Option, description	The option period may be extended for up to 2 years	The option period may be extended for up to 2 years
Non-refundable early option price installment payment	$ 48,308
First Quantum [Member ] | U.S. $ [Member]
FrameworkAgreementWithACompanyLineItems [Line Items]
Payments of option		$ 150,000
Partnership payment of subsidiary		1,350,000
Additional investment offset		1,350,000
Non-refundable early option price installment payment		$ 37,500

XML

Mineral Property, Plant and Equipment - Schedule of Exploration and Evaluation Assets (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands		12 Months Ended
		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
PropertyPlantsAndEquipmentLineItems [Line Items]
Cost, Beginning balance		$ 113,422	$ 113,573
Cost, Additions		473
Cost, Dispositions			(151)
Cost, Ending balance		113,895	113,422
Accumulated depreciation, Beginning balance		(558)	(481)
Accumulated depreciation, Depreciation	[1]	(176)	(205)
Accumulated depreciation, Eliminated on disposal			128
Accumulated depreciation, Ending balance		(734)	(558)
Foreign currency translation difference		20,550	29,608
Net carrying value - Ending balance		133,711	142,472
Mineral Property Interest [Member]
PropertyPlantsAndEquipmentLineItems [Line Items]
Cost, Beginning balance	[2]	112,541	112,541
Cost, Additions	[2]
Cost, Dispositions	[2]
Cost, Ending balance	[2]	112,541	112,541
Accumulated depreciation, Beginning balance	[2]
Accumulated depreciation, Depreciation	[1],[2]
Accumulated depreciation, Eliminated on disposal	[2]
Accumulated depreciation, Ending balance	[2]
Foreign currency translation difference	[2]	20,361	29,381
Net carrying value - Ending balance	[2]	132,902	141,922
Plant and Equipment [Member]
PropertyPlantsAndEquipmentLineItems [Line Items]
Cost, Beginning balance		881	1,032
Cost, Additions		473
Cost, Dispositions			(151)
Cost, Ending balance		1,354	881
Accumulated depreciation, Beginning balance		(558)	(481)
Accumulated depreciation, Depreciation	[1]	(176)	(205)
Accumulated depreciation, Eliminated on disposal			128
Accumulated depreciation, Ending balance		(734)	(558)
Foreign currency translation difference		189	227
Net carrying value - Ending balance		$ 809	$ 550

[1] Depreciation is included in exploration and evaluation expenses.

[2] Comprises the Pebble Project, a contiguous block of 2,402 mineral claims covering approximately 417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.

XML

Mineral Property, Plant and Equipment - Schedule of Exploration and Evaluation Assets (Details) (Parenthetical) - Mineral Property Interest [Member]	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 mi² Integer	Dec. 31, 2016 mi² Integer
PropertyPlantsAndEquipmentItemsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of mineral claims | Integer	2,402	2,402
Area of land | mi²	417	417
Mineral claims covering area, description	417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.	417 square miles located in southwest Alaska, 17 miles (30 kilometers) from the villages of Iliamna and Newhalen, and approximately 200 miles (320 kilometers) southwest of the city of Anchorage.

XML

Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses - Schedule of Amounts Receivable and Prepaid Expenses (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Amounts Receivable And Prepaid Expenses
Sales tax receivable	$ 96	$ 50
Amounts receivable	487	138
Prepaid expenses	411	491
Total	$ 994	$ 679

XML

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash (Details Narrative) $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($) shares	Dec. 31, 2017 USD ($) shares
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Number of warrants exercised | shares	61,500
Cash deposits	$ 757
U.S. $ [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Cash deposits		$ 600
Reclamation liability		$ 2,000
Restricted Stock Units [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Number of common shares issued | shares	22,094	22,094

XML

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash - Schedule of Cash and Cash Equivalents (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016	Dec. 31, 2015
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Total		$ 67,158	$ 7,196	$ 7,509
Business and Savings Accounts [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[1]	62,830	7,196
Guaranteed Investment Certificates [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Total		$ 4,328

[1] $47,149 of this amount relates to the Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment of US$37,500 received which is to be used solely for progressing permitting at the Pebble Project (note 3).

XML

Cash and Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash - Schedule of Cash and Cash Equivalents (Details) (Parenthetical) $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($)	Dec. 31, 2017 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2016 CAD ($)	Dec. 31, 2016 USD ($)
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment	$ 47,149
Business and Savings Accounts [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment	$ 47,149		$ 47,149
Business and Savings Accounts [Member] | US Dollar [Member]
CashAndCashEquivalentLineItems [Line Items]
Non-refundable Early Option Price Installment		$ 37,500		$ 37,500

XML

Capital and Reserves (Details Narrative) $ / shares in Units, $ / shares in Units, $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands			1 Months Ended		12 Months Ended
	Jul. 31, 2017 CAD ($) $ / shares shares	Jun. 30, 2017 CAD ($) $ / shares shares	Jan. 31, 2017 CAD ($)	Jan. 31, 2017 USD ($) $ / shares shares	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($) $ / shares shares	Dec. 31, 2016 CAD ($) $ / shares shares
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Common stock, shares authorized, unlimited					Unlimited	Unlimited
Common stock, par value | $ / shares
Common stock, shares issued fully paid | shares					308,176,356
Common stock, shares issued to be delivered on receipt of payment | shares					61,500
Weighted average exercise price | $ / shares					$ 0.63	$ 0.75
Weighted average remaining life					3 years 3 months 4 days	4 years 18 days
Fair value of options granted					$ 90	$ 107
Weighted average fair value at measurement, share options granted | $ / shares					$ 1.19	$ 0.46
2017 Rolling Option Plant [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Percentage of outstanding common shares					10.00%
2017 Rolling Option Plant [Member] | Administrative Consulting Services [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of share-based compensation of granted shares issued | shares					133,200	150,000
2017 Deal Offering [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Commission, percentage				5.00%
2017 Deal Offering [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of common shares issued | shares				20,240,000
Common share, exercise price | $ / shares				$ 1.85
2016 Prospectus Offering [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Common stock, par value | $ / shares		$ 0.45
Number of common shares issued | shares		38,000,000
Common share, exercise price | $ / shares		$ 0.65
Proceeds from common stock			$ 49,067
Transaction cost			3,180
Net proceeds of common shares			$ 45,887
2016 Prospectus Offering [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Proceeds from common stock				$ 37,440
2016 Private Placement [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Common stock, par value | $ / shares	$ 0.45
Number of common shares issued | shares	4,444,376
Common share, exercise price | $ / shares	$ 0.65
Proceeds from capital stock	$ 2,000
Common stock, shares issued and purchase warrant, description	Each share purchase warrant is exercisable into one common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021.
Share issue related to issuance cost	$ 33
Proceeds from issuance of share capital	1,264
Proceeds from issuance of warrants	$ 703
2016 Prospectus Financing [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Proceeds from capital stock		$ 17,100
Common stock, shares issued and purchase warrant, description		Each Unit consisted of one common share and one common share purchase warrant, which entitles the holder to purchase an additional common share at an exercise price of $0.65 per common share until June 10, 2021.
Share issue related to issuance cost		$ 1,072
Proceeds from issuance of share capital		10,347
Proceeds from issuance of warrants		$ 5,683
Deferred Share Units Plan [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of share-based compensation of granted shares issued | shares
Non-executive directors received compensation percentage					100.00%
Deferred share units outstanding | shares					458,129	458,129
Deferred Share Units Plan [Member] | Maximum [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Percentage of outstanding common shares					2.00%
Group's Share-Based Compensation Plans [Member] | Minimum [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total number of shares issued outstanding shares percentage					10.00%
Restricted Share Units Plan [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Percentage of outstanding common shares					3.00%

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Share Purchase Warrants and Options Not Issued Under the Group’s Incentive Plan (Details)		12 Months Ended
		Dec. 31, 2017 shares $ / shares	Dec. 31, 2016 shares $ / shares
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Expiry Date			Jun. 30, 2019
Options Issued, Beginning Balance		15,861,131	9,755,600
Options Issued, Issued		(36,400)	(38,000)
Options Issued, Expired		(508,100)	(27,000)
Options Issued, Ending Balance		19,847,431	15,861,131
Option and Warrant Derivative Grand Total, Beginning Balance		54,003,284	17,843,648
Option and Warrant Derivative Grand Total, Issued			42,444,376
Option and Warrant Derivative Grand Total, Exercised		(15,829,001)	(5,936,940)
Option and Warrant Derivative Grand Total, Expired		(2,862,724)	(347,800)
Option and Warrant Derivative Grand Total, Ending Balance		35,311,559	54,003,284
Cannon Point [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	446,500	1,170,300
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]	(118,800)	(376,000)
Options Issued, Expired	[1]		(347,800)
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	327,700	446,500
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 5 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.37	$ 0.37
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Jul. 23, 2017	Jul. 23, 2017
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	18,800	18,800
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]	(18,800)
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]		18,800
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 6 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.37	$ 0.37
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Jun. 30, 2019	Jun. 30, 2019
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	56,400	56,400
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	56,400	56,400
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 7 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.40	$ 0.40
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Jun. 30, 2019	Jun. 30, 2019
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	148,050	225,600
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]	(100,000)	(77,550)	[2]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	48,050	148,050
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 8 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.37	$ 0.37
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Mar. 10, 2021	Mar. 10, 2021
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	9,400	9,400
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	9,400	9,400
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 9 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.40	$ 0.40
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Mar. 10, 2021	Mar. 10, 2021
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	82,250	150,400
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]		(68,150)	[2]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	82,250	82,250
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 10 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.37	$ 0.37
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Dec. 15, 2021	Dec. 15, 2021
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	37,600	37,600
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	37,600	37,600
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 11 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.40	$ 0.40
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Dec. 12, 2022	Dec. 12, 2022
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	56,400	75,200
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]		(18,800)
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	56,400	56,400
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 12 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.29	$ 0.29
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]	Dec. 08, 2024	Dec. 08, 2024
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	37,600	37,600
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	37,600	37,600
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 1 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]		$ 0.29
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]		Jan. 29, 2016
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]		150,400
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]		(150,400)
Options Issued, Expired	[1]
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 2 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]		$ 0.37
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]		Jan. 29, 2016
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]		220,900
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]		(61,100)
Options Issued, Expired	[1]		(159,800)
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 3 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]		$ 0.40
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]		Jan. 29, 2016
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]		150,400
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]		(150,400)
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]
Cannon Point [Member] | Exercise Price Range 4 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]		$ 0.43
Options Issued, Expiry Date	[1]		Jan. 29, 2016
Options Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]		37,600
Options Issued, Issued	[1]
Options Issued, Exercised	[1]
Options Issued, Expired	[1]		(37,600)
Options Issued, Ending Balance	[1]
Mission Gold [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Warrants Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	14,160,374	16,673,348
Warrants Issued, Issued	[1]
Warrants Issued, Exercised	[1]	(4,172,004)	(2,512,974)
Warrants Issued, Expired	[1]	(2,862,724)
Warrants Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	7,125,646	14,160,374
Mission Gold [Member] | Exercise Price Range 1 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Warrants Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 0.55	$ 0.55
Warrants Issued, Expiry Date		Jul. 09, 2020	Jul. 09, 2020	[1]
Warrants Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	11,288,698	13,801,672
Warrants Issued, Issued	[1]
Warrants Issued, Exercised	[1]	(4,163,052)	(2,512,974)
Warrants Issued, Expired	[1]
Warrants Issued, Ending Balance	[1]	7,125,646	11,288,698
Mission Gold [Member] | Exercise Price Range 2 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Warrants Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[1]	$ 3.00	$ 3.00
Warrants Issued, Expiry Date		Sep. 14, 2017	Sep. 14, 2017	[1]
Warrants Issued, Beginning Balance	[1]	2,871,676	2,871,676
Warrants Issued, Issued	[1]
Warrants Issued, Exercised	[1]	(8,952)
Warrants Issued, Expired	[1]	(2,862,724)
Warrants Issued, Ending Balance	[1]		2,871,676
Financings [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Warrants Issued, Beginning Balance	[3]	39,396,410
Warrants Issued, Issued	[3]		42,444,376
Warrants Issued, Exercised	[3]	(11,538,197)	(3,047,966)
Warrants Issued, Expired	[3]
Warrants Issued, Ending Balance	[3]	27,858,213	39,396,410
Financings [Member] | Exercise Price Range 1 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Warrants Issued, Exercise Price | $ / shares	[3]	$ 0.65	$ 0.65
Warrants Issued, Expiry Date		Jun. 10, 2021	Jun. 10, 2021	[3]
Warrants Issued, Beginning Balance	[3]	39,396,410
Warrants Issued, Issued	[3]		42,444,376
Warrants Issued, Exercised	[3]	(11,538,197)	(3,047,966)
Warrants Issued, Expired	[3]
Warrants Issued, Ending Balance	[3]	27,858,213	39,396,410

[1] Pursuant to the acquisition of Cannon Point Resources Ltd. ("Cannon Point") and Mission Gold Ltd. ("Mission Gold") in October 2015 and December 2015 respectively, the Group exchanged options and warrants outstanding in these companies for options and warrants to purchase shares in the Company.

[2] The numbers have been revised to correct a disclosure error in 2016 as 56,400 options exercised were incorrectly allocated to options with an expiry of June 30, 2019 instead of options with an expiry of March 10, 2021. There was no impact on loss and loss per share.

[3] Refer to the 2016 prospectus and private placement financings in Note 7(b).

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Share Purchase Warrants and Options Not Issued Under the Group’s Incentive Plan (Details) (Parenthetical)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2016
Capital commitments [abstract]
Options issued, expiry date	Jun. 30, 2019

XML

Capital and Reserves - Summary of Options Outstanding (Details)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 shares $ / shares	Dec. 31, 2016 shares $ / shares
Capital commitments [abstract]
Number of options, beginning balance | shares	15,861,131	9,755,600
Number of options, granted | shares	5,808,000	6,806,000
Number of options, expired | shares	(508,100)	(27,000)
Number of options, exercised | shares	(1,277,200)	(548,869)
Number of options, forfeited | shares	(36,400)	(38,000)
Number of options, cancelled | shares		(86,600)
Number of options, ending balance | shares	19,847,431	15,861,131
Weighted average exercise price, beginning balance | $ / shares	$ 0.92	$ 1.27
Weighted average exercise price, granted | $ / shares	1.75	0.49
Weighted average exercise price, expired | $ / shares	2.88	15.44
Weighted average exercise price, exercised | $ / shares	1.38	0.92
Weighted average exercise price, forfeited | $ / shares	0.89	0.50
Weighted average exercise price, cancelled | $ / shares		1.40
Weighted average exercise price, ending balance | $ / shares	$ 1.08	$ 0.92

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Fair Value Assumptions Using Black Scholes Option Pricing (Details) - $ / shares		12 Months Ended
		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Capital commitments [abstract]
Risk-free interest rate		1.54%	0.54%
Expected life		4 years 6 months 3 days	4 years 8 months 23 days
Expected volatility	[1]	93.82%	82.89%
Grant date share price		$ 1.74	$ 0.67
Expected dividend yield		0.00%	0.00%

[1] Expected volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s closing share price on the TSX.

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Options Exercised (Details) - $ / shares	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	1,277,200	548,869
Weighted average exercise price	$ 1.38	$ 0.92
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 3.19	$ 1.70
January 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	502,200
Weighted average exercise price	$ 1.60
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 3.70
February 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	484,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 1.65
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 3.15
April 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	15,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.89
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 2.03
May 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	223,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.51
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 2.40
July 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	10,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.50
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 1.78
September 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	3,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.50
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 2.28
November 2017 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options	40,000
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.50
Weighted average market share price on exercise	$ 2.56
August 2016 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options		10,000
Weighted average exercise price		$ 0.49
Weighted average market share price on exercise		$ 0.96
September 2016 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options		46,667
Weighted average exercise price		$ 0.50
Weighted average market share price on exercise		$ 1.00
October 2016 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options		60,000
Weighted average exercise price		$ 0.50
Weighted average market share price on exercise		$ 0.97
November 2016 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options		271,668
Weighted average exercise price		$ 1.20
Weighted average market share price on exercise		$ 1.56
December 2016 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options		160,534
Weighted average exercise price		$ 0.74
Weighted average market share price on exercise		$ 2.44

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Options Outstanding and Exercisable (Details) - $ / shares	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	19,847,431	15,861,131
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	2 years 10 months 21 days	3 years 1 month 9 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	13,905,169	10,064,644
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	2 years 6 months 3 days	2 years 7 months 10 days
Exercise Price Range 1 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 0.48	$ 0.48
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	450,000	600,000
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	3 years 2 months 16 days	4 years 2 months 16 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	450,000	200,000
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	3 years 2 months 16 days	4 years 2 months 16 days
Exercise Price Range 2 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 0.49	$ 0.49
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	6,058,000	6,147,000
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	3 years 3 months 4 days	4 years 2 months 30 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	4,001,340	2,009,670
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	3 years 3 months 4 days	4 years 3 months 11 days
Exercise Price Range 3 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 0.50	$ 0.50
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	3,107,831	3,266,831
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	2 years 3 months 19 days	3 years 2 months 23 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	3,107,831	2,074,676
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	2 years 3 months 19 days	3 years 3 months 8 days
Exercise Price Range 4 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 0.72	$ 0.72
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	200,000	200,000
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 8 months 16 days	2 years 8 months 16 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	200,000	200,000
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 8 months 16 days	2 years 8 months 16 days
Exercise Price Range 5 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 0.89	$ 0.89
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	1,125,000	1,180,500
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 3 months 15 days	2 years 2 months 12 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	1,099,998	1,113,498
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 3 months 15 days	2 years 2 months 19 days
Exercise Price Range 6 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 1.75	$ 1.75
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	5,796,600
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	4 years 1 month 2 days	0 years
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	1,936,000
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	4 years 29 days	0 years
Exercise Price Range 7 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 1.77	$ 1.77
Options outstanding, Number outstanding	3,110,000	3,991,800
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 1 month 27 days	1 year 8 months 16 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding	3,110,000	3,991,800
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	1 year 1 month 27 days	1 year 8 months 16 days
Exercise Price Range 8 [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Options outstanding, Exercise prices	$ 3.00	$ 3.00
Options outstanding, Number outstanding		475,000
Options outstanding, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	0 years	5 months 27 days
Options exercisable, Number outstanding		475,000
Options exercisable, Weighted average remaining contractual life (years)	0 years	5 months 27 days

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Restricted Share Units Outstanding (Details) - $ / shares		12 Months Ended
		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Capital commitments [abstract]
Number of RSUs, Beginning Balance		639,031
Number of RSUs, Granted	[1],[2]	542,371	639,031
Number of RSUs, Cash-settled	[3]	(639,031)
Number of RSUs, Withheld	[2]	(13,782)
Number of RSUs, Shares issued	[2]	(22,094)
Number of RSUs, Ending Balance		506,495	639,031
Weighted average fair value, Beginning Balance		$ 0.69
Weighted average fair value, Granted	[1],[2]	2.24	0.69
Weighted average fair value, Cash-settled	[3]	0.69
Weighted average fair value, Withheld	[2]	2.23
Weighted average fair value, Shares issued	[2]	2.23
Weighted average fair value, Ending Balance		$ 2.24	$ 0.69

[1] On July 27, 2017, the Group’s Compensation Committee approved a 2016 executive short term incentive bonus/compensation of $951 to the Group’s Board Chair, CEO and CFO payable through a combination of cash and RSUs. Of the total compensation, $190 was paid in cash with the balance paid by the grant of 434,742 RSUs. The RSUs have a one year term and vest on July 28, 2018. The Group has determined that this grant should be accounted for as cash-settled given the cash settlement of the previous grant to the same individuals (see 1 above). Accordingly, during the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $419 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in a RSU liability for this grant based on the TSX closing price of the Company’s common shares as of the reporting date. At the end of each reporting period, until the RSU liability is settled, the RSU liability’s fair value is remeasured based on the TSX closing price for common shares multiplied by the number of RSUs that will vest and be converted into common shares, and amortized over the vesting period of the RSUs, with any change in fair value charged to share-based compensation.

[2] On September 15, 2017, the Group granted 107,629 RSUs to the CEO of the Pebble Limited Partnership ("PLP CEO") with the following vesting terms: 1/3 vested on grant date; 1/3 vest 1 year from grant date; and 1/3 vest 2 years from grant date. The RSU terms also stipulate that settlement is to be paid out in common shares and the RSUs have a net settlement feature for withholding tax obligations. The Group has treated these RSUs in their entirety as equity-settled as a result of early adopting the amendments to IFRS 2 (note 2(p)). The fair value of the RSUs granted was $240 based on the TSX closing price for the Company’s shares at date of grant. With the first tranche of 35,876 RSUs that vested on date of grant, 13,782 RSUs were withheld to settle and pay the PLP CEO’s tax obligations of $30 and the balance of 22,094 RSUs were issued to the PLP CEO as common shares. The Group has recognized $115 as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve during the year ended December 31, 2017.

[3] On July 11, 2017, 639,031 RSUs granted to the Group’s Board Chair, Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") and Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") vested. The Group settled the equity obligation by making a cash payment of $1,098 based on the 5 day average of TSX closing prices for the Company’s common shares up to July 11, 2017 of $1.72 per RSU pursuant to the terms of the RSU Plan. This payment has been recognized as a decrease in the equity-settled share-based compensation reserve in equity ("SBC Reserve"). In the year ended December 31, 2017, the Group recognized $232 (2016 – $209) as share-based compensation with a corresponding increase in the SBC Reserve.

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Restricted Share Units Outstanding (Details) (Parenthetical) - CAD ($) $ / shares in Units, $ in Thousands				12 Months Ended
	Sep. 15, 2017	Jul. 27, 2017	Jul. 11, 2017	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Equity obligation payment			$ 1,098	$ 1,098
Restricted shares price per share			$ 1.72
Share based compensation				232	$ 209
Share based compensation increase in RSU liability				419
Fair value of restricted stock granted	$ 240
Number of restricted stock withheld shares	13,782
Share based compensation reserve				$ 115
First Tranche [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of restricted stock vested	35,876
Group’s Board Chair, Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") and Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of restricted stock granted		434,742	639,031
Share based compensation		$ 190
Short term incentive bonus		$ 951
Restricted stock units vesting term description		RSUs have a one year term and vest on July 28, 2018
PLP CEO [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of restricted stock granted	107,629
Restricted stock units vesting term description	1/3 vested on grant date; 1/3 vest 1 year from grant date; and 1/3 vest 2 years from grant date.
Payment of tax obligations	$ 30
Number of restricted stock issued as common shares	22,094

XML

Capital and Reserves - Schedule of Foreign Currency Translation Reserve (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Capital commitments [abstract]
Beginning balance	$ 36,233	$ 40,479
Loss on translation of foreign subsidiaries	(8,299)	(4,246)
Ending balance	$ 27,934	$ 36,233

XML

Related Party Balances and Transactions (Details Narrative) $ / shares in Units, $ in Thousands		12 Months Ended
	Jul. 11, 2017 CAD ($)	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($) shares $ / shares	Dec. 31, 2016 CAD ($) shares
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Equity obligation payment	$ 1,098	$ 1,098
Weighted average exercise price | $ / shares		$ 0.47
Weighted average market price on exercise | $ / shares		$ 2.36
Proceeds from KMP		$ 1,803	$ 611
Key Management Personnel [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Number of options exercised | shares		218,800
Proceeds from KMP		$ 103

XML

Related Party Balances and Transactions - Schedule of Related Party Balances and Transactions (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Payables to related parties		$ 1,052	$ 240
Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Payables to related parties	[1]	540	240
Key Management Personnel [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Payables to related parties	[2]	93
RSU liability [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Payables to related parties	[2]	$ 419

[1] Transactions and Balances with other Related Parties

[2] Transactions and Balances with Key Management Personnel (“KMP”)

XML

Related Party Balances and Transactions - Schedule of Outstanding Balances (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands		12 Months Ended
		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Key Management Personnel [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Amounts paid to HDSI for services of KMP employed by HDSI	[1]	$ 3,306	$ 2,274	[2]
Amounts paid and payable to KMP	[3]	2,438	2,262	[2]
Bonuses paid to KMP	[4]	1,660		[2]
Compensation gross		7,404	4,536
Share-based compensation	[5]	4,650	2,428	[2]
Total compensation		12,054	6,964	[2]
Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. [Member]
RelatedPartyTransactionsLineItems [Line Items]
Services rendered by HDSI		5,219	3,584
Technical		2,329	1,157
Engineering		741	83
Environmental		736	375
Socioeconomic		699	660
Other technical services		153	39
General and administrative		2,890	2,427
Management, corporate communications, secretarial, financial and administration		2,225	1,908
Shareholder communication		665	519
Reimbursement of third party expenses		658	499
Conferences and travel		309	175
Insurance		62	54
Office supplies and information technology		287	270
Total value of transactions with HDSI		$ 5,877	$ 4,083

[1] The Group's Chairman, CEO, CFO and senior management (other than disclosed in 2 below) are employed by the Group through Hunter Dickinson Services Inc. (refer (b)).

[2] In the year ended December 31, 2016, the amounts paid and payable to KMP have been revised to correct for a non-material disclosure omission. This omission had no effect on the Statement of Loss and Comprehensive Loss and loss and diluted loss per share.

[3] Represents short term employee benefits, including salaries and director’s fees paid and payable to the Group’s independent directors, PLP CEO, PMC Chair and PLP EVP, SVP and VP.

[4] Performance bonuses were paid to the PLP CEO for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years, incentive bonuses were paid or payable to the SVP, Corporate Development, VP, Engineering (payable to HDSI) and the PLP VP Permitting. In addition, the Group’s CEO and CFO were paid an incentive bonus/compensation for 2016.

[5] Includes cost of DSUs, RSUs and share purchase options issued during the period.

XML

Trade and Other Payables (Details Narrative) $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($) Integer	Dec. 31, 2017 USD ($) Integer
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal fees	$ 5,389
Number of annual instalments | Integer	3	3
Second Instalment December 2018 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal fees	$ 6,650
Third Instalment December 2019 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal fees	6,650
First Instalment December 2017 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal remaining balance for payment	$ 798
U.S. $ [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal counsel due		$ 16,602
Legal fees		15,867
Legal remaining balance for payment		735
U.S. $ [Member] | Second Instalment December 2018 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal fees		5,289
U.S. $ [Member] | Third Instalment December 2019 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal fees		5,289
U.S. $ [Member] | First Instalment December 2017 [Member]
TradeAndOtherPayablesLineItems [Line Items]
Legal counsel due		735
Legal fees		100
Legal remaining balance for payment		$ 635

XML

Trade and Other Payables - Schedule of Trade and Other Payables (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands		Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Trade and other payables [abstract]
Trade	[1]	$ 10,268	$ 1,260
Total		10,268	1,260
Trade	[1]	6,650
Total		$ 6,650

[1] Legal fees

XML

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share (Details Narrative) - shares	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Employee Share Purchase Options [Member]
IncomeStatementLineItems [Line Items]
Anti-dilutive securities excluded from computation of diluted loss per share	19,847,431	15,861,131
Non Employee Share Purchase Options [Member]
IncomeStatementLineItems [Line Items]
Anti-dilutive securities excluded from computation of diluted loss per share	35,311,559	54,003,284
Deferred Share Units [Member]
IncomeStatementLineItems [Line Items]
Anti-dilutive securities excluded from computation of diluted loss per share	458,129
Restricted Share Units [Member]
IncomeStatementLineItems [Line Items]
Anti-dilutive securities excluded from computation of diluted loss per share	506,495

XML

Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share - Schedule of Basic and Diluted Loss Per Share (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Profit or loss [abstract]
Loss attributable to common shareholders	$ 64,865	$ 26,982
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding	300,511,000	246,161,000

XML

Employment Costs (Details Narrative) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Employment Costs
Salaries and benefits	$ 16,342	$ 10,626
Share-based payments	$ 5,858	$ 2,995

XML

Income Tax Expense (Details Narrative) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details
Domestic tax rate, percent	26.00%	26.00%
Investments in foreign subsidiaries	$ 8,700	$ 7,800

XML

Income Tax Expense - Schedule of Current and Deferred Expenses (Details) - CAD ($)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details
Current tax : Current year (recovery) expense
Current income tax (recovery) expense
Deferred income tax : Current year (recovery) expense
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense

XML

Income Tax Expense - Schedule of Reconciliation of Effective Tax Rate (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details
Net loss	$ (64,865)	$ (26,982)
Total income tax (recovery) expense
Loss excluding income tax	(64,865)	(26,982)
Income tax using the Company's domestic tax rate	(16,865)	(7,015)
Non-deductible expenses and other	(1,914)	512
Change in tax rates	(2,950)
Deferred income tax assets not recognized	21,729	6,503
Deferred income tax (recovery) expense

XML

Income Tax Expense - Schedule of Deferred Income Tax Assets (Liabilities) (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
Income Tax Expense - Schedule Of Deferred Income Tax Assets Liabilities Details
Tax losses	$ 2,617	$ 3,214
Net deferred income tax assets	2,617	3,214
Resource property/investment in Pebble Partnership	(2,472)	(3,191)
Equipment	(145)	(23)
Net deferred income tax liability

XML

Income Tax Expense - Schedule of Taxable Temporary Differences On Investments (Details) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017 CAD ($)
Deferred Tax Asset [Member]
DisclosureOfIncomeTaxExpenseLineItems [Line Items]
Tax losses	$ 129,317
Resource pools	101,303
Other	4,991
Within one year [Member]
DisclosureOfIncomeTaxExpenseLineItems [Line Items]
Tax losses
Resource pools
Other
One to Five Years [Member]
DisclosureOfIncomeTaxExpenseLineItems [Line Items]
Tax losses
Resource pools
Other	4,795
After Five Years [Member]
DisclosureOfIncomeTaxExpenseLineItems [Line Items]
Tax losses	129,239
Resource pools
Other
No Expiry Date [Member]
DisclosureOfIncomeTaxExpenseLineItems [Line Items]
Tax losses	78
Resource pools	101,303
Other	$ 196

XML

Financial Risk Management (Details Narrative) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016
DisclosureOfFinancialRiskManagementLineItems [Line Items]
Foreign exchange risk, percent	10.00%
Gain (Loss) on foreign exchange	$ 1,133	$ (43)
Increase decrease in interest rates, percentage	1.00%
Increase decrease in foreign exchange loss	$ 136	73
Foreign Exchange Risk [Member]
DisclosureOfFinancialRiskManagementLineItems [Line Items]
Gain (Loss) on foreign exchange	$ 4,379	$ 191

XML

Financial Risk Management - Schedule of Financial Assets and Liabilities (Details) - CAD ($) $ in Thousands	Dec. 31, 2017	Dec. 31, 2016	Dec. 31, 2015
DisclosureOfFinancialRiskManagementLineItems [Line Items]
Restricted cash	$ 757
Cash and cash equivalents	67,158	7,196	$ 7,509
Financial liabilities: Trade and other payables	10,268	1,260
Credit Risk [Member]
DisclosureOfFinancialRiskManagementLineItems [Line Items]
Amounts receivable	487	138
Restricted cash	757
Cash and cash equivalents	67,158	7,196
Total exposure	68,402	7,334
Foreign Exchange Risk [Member]
DisclosureOfFinancialRiskManagementLineItems [Line Items]
Amounts receivable	552	326
Restricted cash	60,083	2,232
Total exposure	60,635	2,558
Financial liabilities: Trade and other payables	(16,845)	(652)
Net financial (liabilities) assets exposed to foreign currency risk	$ (43,790)	$ 1,906

XML

Commitments and Contingencies - Schedule of Maturity of Leases (Details) - Dec. 31, 2017 $ in Thousands, $ in Thousands		CAD ($)	USD ($)
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total in Canadian dollars	[1]	$ 1,331
U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total			$ 1,059
Anchorage Office Lease [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[2]		944
Pebble Project Site Leases [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[3]	115
Less Than 1 Year [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total in Canadian dollars	[1]	370
Less Than 1 Year [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total			294
Less Than 1 Year [Member] | Anchorage Office Lease [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[2]		179
Less Than 1 Year [Member] | Pebble Project Site Leases [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[3]	115
Between 1 to 5 Years [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total in Canadian dollars	[1]	961
Between 1 to 5 Years [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total			765
Between 1 to 5 Years [Member] | Anchorage Office Lease [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[2]		765
Between 1 to 5 Years [Member] | Pebble Project Site Leases [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[3]
Later Than 5 Years [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total in Canadian dollars	[1]
Later Than 5 Years [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total
Later Than 5 Years [Member] | Anchorage Office Lease [Member] | U.S. $ [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[2]
Later Than 5 Years [Member] | Pebble Project Site Leases [Member]
CapitalCommitmentsLineItems [Line Items]
Total	[3]

[1] Converted at the Wall Street Journal closing rate of $1.2573 per US$1 on December 31, 2017.

[2] Lease which expires November 30, 2022.

[3] The Group has leases for a hangar at site and core storage. The hanger lease expires May 1, 2018 and the core yard lease expires June 1, 2018.

XML

Commitments and Contingencies - Schedule of Maturity of Leases (Details) (Parenthetical)	Dec. 31, 2017 $ / shares
Capital commitments [abstract]
Conversion price per dollar	$ 1.2573