1

4nd Year Assessment Report on Prospecting and Rock Sampling

Licences: 019697M, 013988M, 013993M

Location: 001L/13 and 001M/04

Fortune, Burin Peninsular Newfoundland and Labrador

Submitted by: Michael A. Zagrodnik

for Michael A. Zagrodnik

16 December 2011

Work Year: 4 Total Claims: 11

Total Expenditure: $ 3960.76

2

Table of Contents.

Table of Contents. ...........................................................................................................2 License Status. ................................................................................................................3 Location of Licensed Area...............................................................................................3 Access to the Site. ...........................................................................................................4 Physiographical Setting. ..................................................................................................4 History of Exploration and Development.........................................................................4 Geology and Mineralization. ...........................................................................................5 Current Work Program. ...................................................................................................6 Field Observations...........................................................................................................8 Identification of Focus Area. ...........................................................................................8 Findings within the Focus Area. ......................................................................................8 Comparison of Basic Statistics. .......................................................................................9

Objective. ..................................................................................................................12 Observations..............................................................................................................12 SiO2...........................................................................................................................12 Al2O3.........................................................................................................................12 Fe2O3.........................................................................................................................12 Conclusion. ...............................................................................................................12

Spatial Variation within the Focus Area.........................................................................14 Objective. ..................................................................................................................14 Observations..............................................................................................................14 Conclusions. ..............................................................................................................14

Consolidated Results. ....................................................................................................17 Conclusions...................................................................................................................17 Recommendations. ........................................................................................................18 Map: Location of License Area (Fortune, Burin Peninsular). .........................................19 Map: Location of License Area (Fortune, Burin Peninsular). .........................................20 Table 1. Location of Chip Samples Y(2011). .................................................................21 Measurement Device. ....................................................................................................21 References.....................................................................................................................22 Appendix 1. Personnel and Contractors .........................................................................22 Appendix 2. Statement of Expenditures. ........................................................................23 Distribution of Costs. ....................................................................................................23

3

License Status.

This report shall serve as the 4nd Year Assessment Report for the following Licenses: License No: No. of Claims: Date of Issue: 019697M 9 2007/10/23 013988M 1 2007/10/26 013993M 1 2007/10/26 License 015555M (covering 1 claim) and License 013992M (covering 1 claim) were surrendered in November 2011. License 013971M was partially surrendered in November 2011. The retained claim area (9 claims) was re-licensed as 019697M.

Location of Licensed Area.

Region: Newfoundland, Burin Peninsular. UTM Zone 21 NTS Area: 01L/13 Lamaline and 01M/04 Grand Bank Easting: 582500 to 584500 Northing: 5203500 to 5206000 Elevation: 90m to 180m The License area is located on the south western tip of the Burin Peninsular, on the ridge known as Middle Ridge approximately 10 km SW of the town of Fortune and 7 km NE of Little Danzic Cove. The license area straddles the administrative boundaries of Point Mary Community and Fortune Town.

4

Figure. Location of Mapped Staked Claims.

Access to the Site.

The License Area lies 1km east of the Provincial Highway 220 and is accessed from this highway. Access is made difficult due to the presence of multiple small streams and bogs. Prospecting was carried out on foot.

Physiographical Setting.

The area is of gradually undulating hills rising to approximately 180m on Middle Ridge. Numerous shallow streams and bogs are present and are supported by high levels of rainfall. The area is very much exposed. There are few trees and the vegetation is mostly stunted shrubs, dwarf larch and moss. History of Exploration and Development. “Regional geological mapping in the Fortune area has been carried out by both provincial (Walthier, 1948) and federal (Anderson, 1965) agencies, and portions of the area are treated in more general reports by Dale (1927) and Hutchinson (1962)” (Butler et. al., 1976.)[1]. “In late 1965 the Fortune quartzites were investigated and chip sampled by the Department of Mines and Energy. In 1966, Bartlett carried out detail mapping and nine holes were drilled to examine the quantity and quality of the thick quartzite exposures. Coastal sections were mapped and measured in 1972.

5

S.J. O’Brien et al. (1977), Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, conducted a regional geological survey of the Grand Bank and Lamaline map areas, Burin Peninsula in 1976. D.F. Strong et al. (1978), Newfoundland Department of Mines and Energy, conducted a geological and geochemical survey of the Marystown and St. Lawrence map areas from 1975 to 1977.” (MODS No.2470) [3]. Avalon Rock Products Ltd. prospected Middle Ridge in 1997 and reported a significant deposit of high grade silica material. Further work was recommended.

Geology and Mineralization.

Please refer to [1].

Figure. Location of Focus Area in Relation to Staked Claims.

6

Current Work Program.

The objectives of the work program in 2011 were to: 1) conduct detailed sampling of a Focus Area having previously been identified as having good potential.. 2) locate specific areas of higher purity quartzite suitable for bulk sampling. In late June 2011, a six (6) day program of exploration and sample collection was carried out at the Middle Ridge site in Fortune. Detailed sampling was conducted in a specific area which was selected on the basis of samples obtained between 2008 and 2010. This area is referred to as the ‘Focus Area’ and is located in the central part of the claim area, as shown in the figure above. Samples were taken selectively from visibly clean, exposed bedrock. Samples were of uniform colour with little evidence of fracture or staining. The colour was essentially light cream-grey with occasional hues of brown and pink. The mass of each sample was approximately 1kg. On account of overburden and vegetation it was difficult to sample at regular intervals. Rather samples were taken where the quartzite bedrock was naturally exposed. On average the distance between samples was 15m. The total distance sampled was approximately 300m. Thirty (30) samples were selected and delivered for Whole Rock (lithium meta borate fusion) analysis. The analysis was conducted at Accurassay Laboratories, 1046 Gorham St, Thunder Bay, Ontario (Ref# 201130115).

7

Sample Locations within the Focus Area

5204500

5204600

5204700

5204800

5204900

5205000

583500 583600 583700 583800

Easting

Nort

hin

g

Focus Area

Band 1

Band 2

Band 3

Figure. Detailed location of samples within the Focus Area.

8

Field Observations.

The Focus Area lies near the highest part of the Middle Ridge and roughly in the center of the claim area. Within the Focus Area the quartzite bedrock is generally visible with vegetation covering approximately 60% of the surface. The un-fractured material can be described as cream-grey in colour, hard and brittle. Fractures however are common and give rise to dark brown staining along fracture lines. In this exercise however, only clean samples (without visible fracture or staining) were taken.

The Fortune-Middle Ridge quartzite deposit has previously been described as comprising three distinct bands. The Focus Area is associated with Band 1 as shown below. The location of samples within the Focus Area is shown in red.

Identification of Focus Area.

Sample Locations indicating Bands

5202000

5203000

5204000

5205000

5206000

5207000

581000 582000 583000 584000 585000Easting

Nort

hin

g

Focus Area

Band 1

Band 2

Band 3

Figure. Location of the Focus Area (area of detained sampling) in relationship to the

previously identified bands of quartzite outcroppings.

Findings within the Focus Area.

The assay results obtained from samples taken within the Focus Area were compared against samples taken from other areas of the claim site (ie areas excluding the Focus Area). The purpose here was to determine if the composition from within the Focus Area

9

was significantly different from the other areas. To do this the sample mean, variances and distribution profiles were compared. Sample data obtained from previous years (2008-2010) was pooled to provide a comprehensive data base of samples taken from outside the Focus Area. Earlier samples which may have been taken from within the Focus Area were combined with the recent samples taken in 2011.

Comparison of Basic Statistics.

Focus Area Non-Focus Area Oxide Mean(µ) Std Dev(σ) Mean(µ) Std Dev(σ) SiO2 90.57 % 3.80 % 95.18 % 1.82 % Al2O3 1.58 % 1.09 % 1.34 % 0.63 % Fe2O3 1.88 % 1.97 % 1.24 % 0.51 % CaO 0.81 % 0.63 % 0.44 % 0.48 % Focus Area Non-Focus Area Oxide 95% Confidence Level 95% Confidence Level SiO2 89.23 % - 91.91 % 94.89 % - 98.47 % Al2O3 1.19 % - 1.97 % 1.24 % - 1.44 % Fe2O3 1.18 % - 2.58 % 1.16 % - 1.32 %

CaO 0.59 % - 1.03 % 0.35 % - 0.52 %

For comparison the results obtained by Butler and Greene (1966) [1] are indicated below: Oxide Mean(µ) SiO2 96.4 Al2O3 1.5% Fe2O3 0.5% CaO not indicated

10

Concentration of SiO2

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99

Concentration [%]

Norm

aliz

ed F

requency

Claim Area

Focus Area

Figure. Distribution profile of SiO2 within the Focus Area compared against the

distribution of SiO2 outside the Focus Area.

Concentration of Al2O3

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.2 0.6 1 1.4 1.8 2.2 2.6

Concentration [%]

Norm

aliz

ed F

requency

Claim Area

Focus Area

Figure. Distribution profile of Al2O3 within the Focus Area compared against the

distribution of Al2O3 outside the Focus Area.

11

Concentration of Fe2O3

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8

Concentration [%]

Norm

aliz

ed F

requency

Claim Area

Focus Area

Figure. Distribution profile of Fe2O3 within the Focus Area compared against the

distribution of Fe2O3 outside the Focus Area.

Concentration of CaO

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

Concentration [%]

Norm

aliz

ed F

requency

Claim Area

Focus Area

Figure. Distribution profile of CaO within the Focus Area compared against the

distribution of CaO outside the Focus Area.

12

Objective.

The objective here was to compare the distributions of the major oxides from both sample sets to determine if the quartzite composition within the Focus Area is significantly different. Of interest is the average, variation and shape of the distribution profiles. Samples of sufficient size, if taken from the same population (mineral deposit), should despite variations due to sampling, have roughly the same distribution profiles.

Observations.

The distribution profiles of the major oxides, appear to be of ‘roughly’ the same shape both inside and outside the Focus Area. The distributions are visibly non-symmetrical. The data however was not tested for normality.

SiO2.

Approximately 40% of the samples taken from the Focus Area were shown to have SiO2 concentration less than 90%. This large number of low purity samples clearly reduces the sample mean. Significant also is the range of the samples. Within the Focus Area the highest purity of SiO2 was measured at only 95.48%. This value is less than the average purity (95.18%) found in samples outside the Focus Area. The combination a low sample mean together with an absence of any high purity samples, suggests that there may be significant differences in SiO2 purity.

Al2O3.

The sampled distribution appears to have two peaks. This is likely to be related to the small sample size and binning of data. Such distributions may also occur when two distinct populations are sampled. In this case there may be a distinct area of high Al2O3 concentration and another area of low concentration. The possibility for spatial variation within the Focus Area is examined in a later section.

Fe2O3.

The concentration of the oxide within the Focus Area is unremarkable.

Conclusion.

1) The distribution profile of the major oxides, other than SiO2, within the Focus Area is not significantly different from the distribution profile taken from samples outside of the Focus Area. 2) With regards to concentrations of Fe2O3 and Al2O3, there is partial overlapping of the 95% Confidence Levels for estimates of the Mean. With regards to CaO the 95% Confidence bands do not overlap but they are close .The concentrations of CaO appear to be slightly higher in the Focus Area.

13

3) The purity of SiO2 within the Focus Area appears to be significantly less than outside the Focus Area. The average concentration within the Focus Area was found to be 90.6% while the outside average is estimated at 95.2%. There is a wide gap between the 95% Confidence Limits for estimates of the respective Means. It is unlikely that such a large difference is a result of sampling variation.

14

Spatial Variation within the Focus Area.

Objective.

The spatial variation of the major oxides within the Focus Area is examined. The purpose here is to visually identify spatial trends or patterns, meaning areas of higher or lower concentration. Please see Figures below.

Observations.

The concentration of Al2O3 and Fe2O3 appears be slightly less in the north-east side of the focus area. This may explain the two peaks observed earlier in the concentration distribution for Al2O3. For SiO2 and CaO, no spatial patterns were identified. The variation in composition appears random.

Conclusions.

The concentration of Al2O3 and Fe2O3 appears to improve slightly towards the north-east of the Focus Area. No spatial trends were observed for SiO2 and CaO.

Distribution of SiO2 within Focus Area

5204550

5204600

5204650

5204700

5204750

5204800

5204850

5204900

583500 583550 583600 583650 583700 583750

Easting

Nort

hin

g

> 95%

94% to 95%

92% to 94%

90% to 92%

87% to 90%

82% to 86%

Figure. Distribution of SiO2 within the Focus Area.

15

Distribution of Al2O3 within Focus Area

5204550

5204600

5204650

5204700

5204750

5204800

5204850

5204900

583500 583550 583600 583650 583700 583750

Easting

Nort

hin

g

> 3%

2.0% to 3.0%

1.5% to 2.0%

1.0% to 1.5%

< 1%

Figure. Distribution of Al2O3 within the Focus Area.

Distribution of CaO within Focus Area

5204550

5204600

5204650

5204700

5204750

5204800

5204850

5204900

583500 583550 583600 583650 583700 583750

Easting

Nort

hin

g

> 1.0%

0.8 to 1.0%

0.6 to 0.8%

0.4% to 0.6%

0.2% to 0.4%

Figure. Distribution of CaO within the Focus Area.

16

Distribution Fe2O3 within the Focus Area

5204550

5204600

5204650

5204700

5204750

5204800

5204850

5204900

583500 583550 583600 583650 583700 583750

Easting

Nort

hin

g

> 3%

2.0% to 3.0%

1% to 2%

0.5% to 1.0%

< 0.5%

Figure. Distribution of Fe2O3 within the Focus Area.

17

Consolidated Results.

The assay results obtained in year 2011 were combined with earlier results obtained in years 2008-2010. From this expanded data set a revised composition profile (covering the whole claim area) is obtained.

Combined Samples

Oxide Mean [% by mass] Standard Deviation SiO2 94.35 % 2.89 %

Al2O3 1.22 % 0.75 %

Fe2O3 1.35 % 0.97 % CaO 0.50 % 0.53 %

For convenience of comparison, the results obtained by Butler and Greene (1966) [1] are again listed below: Oxide Mean(µ) SiO2 96.4 Al2O3 1.5% Fe2O3 0.5% CaO not indicated

Conclusions.

a) Our results are comparable with the results of Butler and Greene although the new data continues to suggest that the body is of lower grade than reported by Butler and Greene [1]. The consolidated results of nearly 200 samples indicate a mean of 94.4% SiO2 with 95% confidence limits placed at 93.9% and 94.8%. Butler and Greene have reported a SiO2 concentration of 96.4%. b) CaO is uniformly distributed across the samples at a low level of average 0.5%. c) Oxide Fe2O3 was measured at 1.4%. Butler and Green however have reported a Fe2O3 level of 0.5%. The large discrepancy is unexplained. d) Oxide Al203 was measured at 1.2%. This is generally in agreement with Butler and Green who have reported an average of 1.5%. c) Detailed sampling within the Focus Area has indicated that there may be slight reduction in Al2O3 and Fe2O3 concentrations towards the north-east of the Focus Area. This however is not accompanied by an increase in SiO2 concentration. Rather the distribution of SiO2 remains random. The average SiO2 concentration within the Focus Area was found to be only 90.6%. This is significantly less than the 94.4% average over the entire claim area.

19

Map

: Loca

tion

of L

icense A

rea (F

ortu

ne, B

urin

Pen

insu

lar).

20

Map

: Loca

tion

of L

icense A

rea (F

ortu

ne, B

urin

Pen

insu

lar).

21

Table 1. Location of Chip Samples Y(2011).

Easting Northing Client ID

583552 5204609 551601

583545 5204607 551602

583557 5204610 551603

583568 5204635 551604

583570 5204637 551605

583565 5204643 551606

583603 5204658 551607

583593 5204660 551608

583590 5204656 551609

583603 5204683 551610

583603 5204683 551610

583610 5204679 551611

583610 5204683 551612

583627 5204708 551613

583633 5204703 551614

583632 5204713 551615

583625 5204727 551616

683611 5204736 551617

583609 5204724 551618

583641 5204748 551619

583651 5204761 551620

583651 5204761 551620

583650 5204767 551621

583656 5204776 551622

583658 5204794 551623

583659 5204802 551624

583683 5204815 551625

583701 5204809 551626

583699 5204829 551627

583708 5204838 551628

583731 5204842 551629

583740 5204847 551630

583740 5204847 551630

Measurement Device.

Location was measured with a handheld GPS device Manufacturer: Garmin Model: eTrex Accuracy: +/- 10m

22

References.

[1] Butler, A J and Greene, B A 1976: Silica resources of Newfoundland. Mineral Development Division, Department of Mines and Energy, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Report 76-02, 78 pages. [GSB# NFLD/0947] [2] MODS Report 2989 001M/04/Sia001 [3] MODS Report 2470 001L/13/Sia001

Appendix 1. Personnel and Contractors

1) Surname: Zagrodnik Given Name: Michael Adam Address: Schumacher, Ontario Function: Proponent and License Holder 2) Surname: Saba Given Name: Mazin Address: Woodbridge, Ontario Function: Assistant with Prospector Training

23

Appendix 2. Statement of Expenditures.

No: Description: Rate: SubTotal[$] 1. Prospecting (28/06 to 04/07) 6 days@ $100/day 600.00 Zagrodnik, Michael A. (License Holder) 2. Prospecting (28/06 to 04/07) 6 days@$180/day 1080.00 Saba, Mazin 3. Analytical Charges 30 samples@$25.50/sample (nett) 765.00 AccurAssay Laboratories Inv No: IN110672 18/08/2011 5. Accommodation (camping charge) 57.52 6. Sample bags, tape, markers, adhesive 7.93 7. Petrol 321.30 8. Meals (28/06 to 04/07) 2men x 6days@$20/day(gross) 212.39 9. Report Preparation 4 days 400.00 Subtotal 3444.14 10. Overhead (15%) 516.62 Total 3960.76 Note: All listed costs are nett and exclude HST.

Distribution of Costs.

Costs are to be distributed equally over all claims. License No: No. of Claims: 019697M 9 3240.62 013988M 1 360.07 013993M 1 360.07 Total 11 Claims 3960.76

Tuesday, September 6, 2011Certificate of Analysis

Zagrodnik, Michael A.P.O Box 697, 101 First AvenueSchumacher, On, CANP0N 1G0Ph#: (705) 264-2966Email: mzag_mailbag@yahoo.com

Date Received: 07/04/2011

Date Completed: 08/08/2011

Job #: 201130115

Reference:

Sample #: 30

Acc #   Client ID   Al203%

Ca0%

Cr203%

Fe203%

K20%

Mg0%

Mn0%

Na20%

P205%

Si02%

Ti02%

L0I%

Total%

 7182   551601    0.620 0.409 0.010 0.473 0.214 0.088 0.005 3.537 0.014 92.384 0.035 1.299 99.087

 7183   551602    2.281 0.603 0.012 7.769 0.369 0.668 0.036 3.184 0.037 83.225 0.110 0.800 99.093

 7184   551603    3.513 0.894 0.016 1.051 0.359 0.217 0.017 4.415 0.032 87.671 0.147 0.599 98.930

 7185   551604    1.427 0.490 0.010 4.456 0.379 0.443 0.021 3.712 0.032 86.881 0.067 0.998 98.916

 7186   551605    2.424 1.153 0.018 7.859 0.330 0.680 0.036 3.135 0.034 82.528 0.100 0.799 99.096

 7187   551606    0.605 1.179 0.009 1.481 0.172 0.153 0.009 1.867 0.023 92.476 0.068 0.900 98.942

 7188   551607    0.888 0.280 0.010 2.579 0.240 0.211 0.013 3.563 0.021 90.334 0.045 0.800 98.983

 7189   551608    0.622 0.333 0.010 0.559 0.241 0.068 0.005 1.964 0.014 94.397 0.040 0.699 98.952

 7190   551609    0.996 0.852 0.006 0.426 0.152 0.511 0.027 1.841 0.018 93.196 0.075 0.900 99.000

 7191   551610    0.935 0.695 0.012 4.328 0.239 0.401 0.019 2.018 0.025 89.457 0.067 0.699 98.895

 7192 Dup  551610    0.930 0.670 0.015 4.416 0.226 0.385 0.008 4.211 0.021 90.409 0.050 0.699 102.040

 7193   551611    1.744 0.547 0.013 0.945 0.391 0.184 0.008 4.727 0.023 89.410 0.060 0.700 98.753

 7194   551612    5.674 2.145 0.012 1.594 0.522 0.597 0.027 5.168 0.053 82.269 0.112 0.700 98.872

 7195   551613    1.124 0.343 0.009 0.605 0.341 0.131 0.005 3.801 0.018 91.827 0.042 0.700 98.946

 7196   551614    2.768 0.775 0.016 1.305 0.452 0.983 0.019 3.873 0.046 87.209 0.093 1.309 98.849

 7197   551615    3.964 1.785 0.010 1.275 0.435 0.209 0.021 4.304 0.037 86.015 0.083 0.899 99.037

 7198   551616    1.685 1.074 0.020 1.394 0.354 1.424 0.028 2.278 0.041 89.194 0.120 1.100 98.714

 7199   551617    1.973 0.669 0.015 0.868 0.547 0.169 0.008 3.885 0.018 89.778 0.060 0.898 98.887

 7200   551618    1.326 0.348 0.010 0.751 0.360 0.133 0.008 2.104 0.018 92.732 0.060 1.000 98.851

 7201   551619    1.697 0.544 0.010 0.746 0.463 0.164 0.006 4.035 0.025 90.396 0.088 0.699 98.874

PROCEDURE CODES: ALP1, ALWR1

Certified By:

The results included on this report relate only to the items tested The Certificate of Analysis should not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory

AL918-0766-09/06/2011 1:42 PMPage 1 of 2

Tuesday, September 6, 2011Certificate of Analysis

Zagrodnik, Michael A.P.O Box 697, 101 First AvenueSchumacher, On, CANP0N 1G0Ph#: (705) 264-2966Email: mzag_mailbag@yahoo.com

Date Received: 07/04/2011

Date Completed: 08/08/2011

Job #: 201130115

Reference:

Sample #: 30

Acc #   Client ID   Al203%

Ca0%

Cr203%

Fe203%

K20%

Mg0%

Mn0%

Na20%

P205%

Si02%

Ti02%

L0I%

Total%

 7202   551620    0.693 0.877 0.007 1.351 0.248 0.148 0.009 0.332 0.018 94.647 0.048 0.500 98.879

 7203 Dup  551620    0.663 0.872 0.009 1.328 0.249 0.143 0.008 0.487 0.021 94.824 0.077 0.799 99.479

 7204   551621    1.402 1.996 0.010 4.785 0.290 0.608 0.032 3.330 0.030 85.640 0.103 0.799 99.027

 7205   551622    1.430 0.350 0.009 0.942 0.512 0.113 0.006 3.681 0.016 91.061 0.048 0.799 98.969

 7206   551623    0.835 0.200 0.009 0.568 0.342 0.081 0.005 0.387 0.016 95.475 0.045 0.999 98.962

 7207   551624    1.166 0.422 0.010 1.224 0.426 0.161 0.009 0.438 0.023 94.187 0.053 0.799 98.919

 7208   551625    0.877 0.378 0.010 2.266 0.324 0.191 0.010 0.435 0.023 93.588 0.133 0.699 98.934

 7209   551626    0.680 0.651 0.010 1.271 0.271 0.164 0.009 3.436 0.018 92.054 0.048 0.400 99.013

 7210   551627    1.289 0.606 0.013 0.741 0.418 0.293 0.009 0.620 0.025 94.296 0.112 0.600 99.022

 7211   551628    1.867 3.148 0.010 0.864 0.379 0.250 0.013 4.250 0.027 87.500 0.107 0.499 98.914

 7212   551629    1.066 0.509 0.012 0.633 0.355 0.098 0.006 0.558 0.018 95.120 0.073 0.500 98.949

 7213   551630    1.436 0.207 0.010 0.516 0.560 0.101 0.006 0.487 0.021 94.812 0.052 0.699 98.907

 7214 Dup  551630    1.765 0.599 0.010 0.636 0.542 0.111 0.008 0.631 0.018 93.727 0.055 0.800 98.902

PROCEDURE CODES: ALP1, ALWR1

Certified By:

The results included on this report relate only to the items tested The Certificate of Analysis should not be reproduced except in full, without the written approval of the laboratory

AL918-0766-09/06/2011 1:42 PMPage 2 of 2