We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thor Energy Plc | LSE:THR | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BRJ52319 | ORD GBP0.001 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 1.20 | 1.10 | 1.30 | 1.20 | 1.20 | 1.20 | 64,216 | 08:00:00 |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Misc Nonmtl Minrls, Ex Fuels | 0 | -520k | -0.0019 | -6.32 | 3.34M |
From Apr 2019 to Apr 2024
TIDMTHR
RNS Number : 7378F
Thor Mining PLC
22 May 2017
22 May 2017
THOR MINING PLC
TUNGSTEN RESOURCE INCREASE OF 55% - PILOT MOUNTAIN , NEVADA USA
The Board of Thor Mining Plc ("Thor" or the "Company") (AIM, ASX: THR) is pleased to announce a 55% tungsten resource inventory increase at the Company's wholly owned Pilot Mountain tungsten project in Nevada, USA, representing a maiden resource estimate for the Garnet prospect, and an increase in the resource estimate at Desert Scheelite.
Following drilling in March this year, an inferred resource estimate for the Garnet deposit has been completed comprising 1.83 million tonnes (Mt) at an average grade of 0.36% WO(3) (using cut-off grade of 1,000 ppm WO(3) ).
Further, a re-evaluation of the Desert Scheelite deposit has resulted in an upgrading of the resource estimate to 9.9 million tonnes at an average grade of 0.26% WO , 19.39 gram/tonne Silver (Ag), and 0.14% copper (Cu) (using cut-off grade of 1,500 ppm WO(3,) previously 2,000ppm).
The total Pilot Mountain resource inventory now stands at 11.73 Million tonnes at 0.28% WO(3) (Table 1).
Table 1: Pilot Mountain Resource Summary 2017 (JORC 2012) - 100% owned by Thor Mining Plc
Hot Features
Premium
Resource WO(3) Ag Cu
MT Grade Contained Grade Contained Grade Contained
% metal g/t metal % metal
(t) (t) (t)
------------ ----------- ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Garnet Indicated - -
Inferred 1.83 0.36 6,590
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Sub
Total 1.83 0.36 6,590
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Desert
Scheelite Indicated 8.41 0.27 22,700 21.3 179 0.14 11,800
Inferred 1.49 0.23 3,430 9.07 13 0.17 2,500
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Sub
Total 9.90 0.26 26,130 19.39 192 0.14 14,300
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Summary Indicated 8.41 0.27 22,690
Inferred 3.32 0.30 10,020
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Pilot Mountain
Total 11.73 0.28 32,720
------------------------- ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ ---------
Note:
-- All figures are rounded to reflect appropriate levels of confidence. Apparent differences may occur due to rounding.
Mr Mick Billing, Executive Chairman of Thor: "This is a significant step forward for the Pilot Mountain project. The resource inventory still has considerable growth potential via the GunMetal and Good Hope deposits, as well as more potential upside at Desert Scheelite and Garnet"
"Importantly, the grade of mineralisation at Pilot Mountain is relatively high and this underpins the robust nature of the project."
Garnet Deposit
Six holes were drilled to validate historic drill data from Union Carbide Corp drilling undertaken in the 1970's. Significant intercepts include:
Hole 17GRRC01 3.8m @ 0.31%WO(3) and 2.2%Zn from 4.6m
3.8m @ 0.72%WO(3) and 1.6%Zn from 45.0m
5.3m @ 1.0%WO(3) and 0.9%Zn from 83.1m
Hole 17GRRC06 6.1m @ 0.24%WO(3) from 16.5m
14.5m @ 0.31%WO(3) , 0.3%Zn from 25.9m
Zinc grades from the 2017 drilling appear sufficient to produce a saleable bi-product to the Scheelite stream. Zinc data is not included in the historic database and the 2017 drilling zinc data alone is insufficient to estimate an inferred zinc resource. On the basis of the 2017 drill data, the following zinc exploration target*has been derived for the Garnet deposit:
1.4 - 1.8 Mt at 0.5 to 1.0% Zinc
(7,000 - 18,000 tonnes contained Zn metal)
Further opportunities for the growth of the Garnet resource are being evaluated for follow up drilling.
*Exploration Targets are conceptual in nature and there is insufficient data to define a Mineral Resource under the JORC Code. It is uncertain if further exploration will result in the determination of a Mineral Resource.
Desert Scheelite Deposit
Following a review of the Desert Scheelite deposit and a comparison with the Garnet deposit where a WO cut-off grade of 1,000ppm was applied, it was decided to amend the Desert Scheelite resource cut-off grade to 1,500ppm WO , from the previously applied 2,000ppm WO . The Mineral Resource Estimate was originally announced for a range of cut-off grades (including 1,500ppm WO(3) ) on 10 June 2014.
Enquiries:
Mick Billing +61 (8) 7324 Thor Mining Executive
1935 PLC Chairman
Ray Ridge +61 (8) 7324 Thor Mining CFO/Company
1935 PLC Secretary
Colin Aaronson/ +44 (0) 207 Grant Thornton Nominated
Daniel Bush/ 383 5100 UK LLP Adviser
Richard Tonthat
Elliot Hance +44 (0) 207382 Beaufort Securities Joint Broker
8300 Limited
Nick Emerson +44 (0) 1483 SI Capital Ltd Joint Broker
/ Andy Thacker 413 500
Tim Blythe/ +44 (0) 207 Blytheweigh Financial
Camilla Horsfall 138 3222 PR
The information contained within this announcement is deemed to constitute inside information as stipulated under the Market Abuse Regulations (EU) No. 596/2014. Upon the publication of this announcement, this inside information is now considered to be in the public domain.
Updates on the Company's activities are regularly posted on Thor's website www.thormining.com, which includes a facility to register to receive these updates by email, and on the Company's twitter page @ThorMining.
Competent Person's Report
The information in this report that relates to the Desert Scheelite and Garnet JORC Resource Estimates is based on information compiled by Mr. Stephen Godfrey, who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists and Australasian Institute of Mining & Metallurgy and who has had sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration and to the activities which are being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves' . Mr. Godfrey is an employee of Resource Evaluation Services and consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.
The information in this report that relates to exploration results and exploration targets is based on information compiled by Richard Bradey, who holds a BSc in applied geology and an MSc in natural resource management and who is a Member of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Bradey is an employee of Thor Mining PLC. He has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves'. Richard Bradey consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears..
About Pilot Mountain
Thor's Pilot Mountain Project, acquired in 2014, is located approximately 200 kilometres south of the city of Reno and 20 kilometres east of the town of Mina located on US Highway 95.
The Pilot Mountain Project comprises four tungsten deposits: Desert Scheelite, Gunmetal, Garnet and Good Hope. All are in close proximity (three kilometres) to each other and have been subjected to small-scale mining activities at various times during the 20th century. Union Carbide acquired the project in 1978, for US$7.0 million (estimated at US$26million - US$40million in 2017 dollars), and conducted detailed exploration and feasibility activities until, following a global downturn in the tungsten industry in the 1980s, they suspended further work.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report Garnet Resource Estimate
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Sampling The Garnet resource
techniques * Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, is defined by 6 Reverse
random chips, or specific specialised industry Circulation holes
standard measurement tools appropriate to the drilled in 2017 and
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma 73 holes drilled in
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These the 1970s comprising
examples should not be taken as limiting the broad 24 diamond drill holes
meaning of sampling. 9 "rotary" holes and
40 drill holes undefined.
* Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample The recent drilling
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any used reverse circulation
measurement tools or systems used. to obtain samples.
2kg subsamples were
taken using rotary
* Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that splitter for logging
are Material to the Public Report. and laboratory analysis.
Chip tray samples
were collected logged
* In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done and photographed.
this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples The recent Garnet
from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30g drill holes were sampled
charge for fire assay'). In other cases, more at 2.5 foot intervals.
explanation may be required, such as where there is The historic holes
coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. have samples recorded
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg over intervals from
submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed 1 to 50 feet, most
information. commonly 5 feet.
Sampling and analysis
for the 1970s drilling
is unknown.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Drilling The earlier 1970s
techniques * Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole drilling method is
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) diamond and "rotary",
and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard believed to be percussion
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or with anular return.
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by
what method, etc). The recent drilling
was RC using a face
sampling hammer
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Drill Sample recoveries
sample * Method of recording and assessing core and chip have not been systematically
recovery sample recoveries and results assessed. quantified but anecdotally
are consistently high.
* Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
representative nature of the samples.
* Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery
and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred
due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse
material.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Logging The 6 drill holes
* Whether core and chip samples have been geologically from 2017 program
and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to have information for
support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, collar, survey, assay,
mining studies and metallurgical studies. lithology, weathering.
Geology of the hole
cuttings was qualitative
* Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in logged and photographed
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. over the entire hole
length.
* The total length and percentage of the relevant Older holes contain
intersections logged. only collar survey
and assay data with
some geological logging
of selected holes
and intervals.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Sub-sampling 2kg subsamples were
techniques * If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, taken using a rotary
and sample half or all core taken. splitter. This size
preparation sample is considered
representative considering
* If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary the rock type and
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. grain size.
* For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.
* Quality control procedures adopted for all
sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.
* Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in situ material collected,
including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
* Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain
size of the material being sampled.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Quality Assaying of the 2017
of assay * The nature, quality and appropriateness of the samples was conducted
data assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether by ALS Global minerals
and laboratory the technique is considered partial or total. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
tests Sample and assay method
has previously been
* For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF approved by independent
instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining resource estimate
the analysis including instrument make and model, practitioner.
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
derivation, etc. QA/QC protocol has
been adopted using
certified reference
* Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg material; certified
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory blank material and
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie field duplicate samples
lack of bias) and precision have been established. inserted at a rate
of 15% or better.
Validation of the
1970s assay results
was undertaken by
twinning of the older
holes with the recent
drilling. The twin
holes contain comparable
lithologies and assay
grades. One pair is
anomalous due to a
probable ground survey
error.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Verification Twin holes were used
of sampling * The verification of significant intersections by to successfully check
and assaying either independent or alternative company personnel. the veracity of the
historical drilling.
* The use of twinned holes. The compiled drilling
data was checked for
internal consistency
* Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, as part of the resource
data verification, data storage (physical and estimation.
electronic) protocols.
Database Analytical
data for the 20017
* Discuss any adjustment to assay data. program was validated
against laboratory
reports.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Location Hole collar co-ordinates
of data * Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill are referenced to
points holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine NAD 83 (zone 11N).
workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource Historic collar locations
estimation. from 1970s were digitised
from maps translated
to NAD83. Locations
* Specification of the grid system used. were cross checked
against several maps.
* Quality and adequacy of topographic control. For the 2017 drilling,
downhole surveys have
been conducted using
north seeking gyroscopic
down hole tool. Collar
locations have been
determined by US registered
surveyor using differential
GPS
The topography was
based on a 1 m DEM.
Drill hole collars
were registered to
the topographic surface
to remove minor discrepancies.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Data Exploration results
spacing * Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. are not being reported.
and distribution
Drill holes are inconsistently
* Whether the data spacing and distribution is spaced at 10 m to
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and 50 m on SE-NW sections
grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource nominally 100 m apart.
and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
* Whether sample compositing has been applied.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Orientation The Garnet mineralisation
of data * Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased is hosted in sub horizontal
in relation sampling of possible structures and the extent to sediments dipping
to geological which this is known, considering the deposit type. gently to the NNW.
structure The sub vertical drilling
provides representative
* If the relationship between the drilling orientation sampling of the deposit.
and the orientation of key mineralised structures is
considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this
should be assessed and reported if material.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Sample Chain of custody details
security * The measures taken to ensure sample security. for the 1970s drilling
are unavailable.
The chain of custody
for the 2011/2012
drill program at Desert
Scheelite was reviewed
on site by the CP
delegate and deemed
to be adequate.
Similar procedures
were in place for
the Garnet drill program.
Samples are under
the supervision of
the site geologist
and stored in a secure,
locked shed prior
to shipment to the
laboratory.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Audits At this stage of the
or reviews * The results of any audits or reviews of sampling project no other independent
techniques and data. external audits have
been undertaken.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Mineral 100% Thor Mining plc
tenement * Type, reference name/number, location and ownership mineral leases cover
and land including agreements or material issues with third the Desert Scheelite
tenure parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, prospect area located
status overriding royalties, native title interests, on the eastern flank
historical sites, wilderness or national park and of Pilot Mountain,
environmental settings. 250 km southeast of
the city of Reno and
20km east of the town
* The security of the tenure held at the time of of Mina, in Nevada,
reporting along with any known impediments to USA.
obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
No known impediments
to licence an operation.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Exploration The deposit discovery
done * Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other date is not known.
by other parties. The deposit was held
parties by Duval in the early
1970s and subsequently
by the Union Carbide
Corporation (UCC)
in the late 1970s
Pre - 2012 data is
treated as historic
data and used as a
guide only unless
validated.
Pre-existing data
post-2012 complies
with JORC 2012 code.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Geology Contact metamorphic
* Deposit type, geological setting and style of skarn hosted tungsten.
mineralisation.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Drill Details of the drilling
hole * A summary of all information material to the used to define the
Information understanding of the exploration results including a resources are included
tabulation of the following information for all in the resource estimation
Material drill holes: documentation.
o easting and northing
of the drill hole collar
o elevation or RL (Reduced
Level - elevation above
sea level in metres) of
the drill hole collar
o dip and azimuth of the
hole
o down hole length and
interception depth
o hole length.
* If the exclusion of this information is justified on
the basis that the information is not Material and
this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person
should clearly explain why this is the case.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Data Exploration results
aggregation * In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging are not being reported.
methods techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations
(eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are
usually Material and should be stated.
* Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths
of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade
results, the procedure used for such aggregation
should be stated and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
* The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
equivalent values should be clearly stated.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Relationship Exploration results
between * These relationships are particularly important in the are not being reported.
mineralisation reporting of Exploration Results.
widths
and intercept
lengths * If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to
the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be
reported.
* If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are
reported, there should be a clear statement to this
effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Diagrams Exploration results
* Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and are not being reported.
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any
significant discovery being reported These should
include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional
views.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Balanced Exploration results
reporting * Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration are not being reported.
Results is not practicable, representative reporting
of both low and high grades and/or widths should be
practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Other Exploration results
substantive * Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, are not being reported.
exploration should be reported including (but not limited to):
data geological observations; geophysical survey results;
geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk
density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock
characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminating substances.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Further Exploration results
work * The nature and scale of planned further work (eg are not being reported.
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).
* Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
extensions, including the main geological
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided
this information is not commercially sensitive.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant
in section 2, also apply to this section.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Database A check of the database
integrity * Measures taken to ensure that data has not been against laboratory
corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying certificates was undertaken
errors, between its initial collection and its use as part of the database
for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. validation. The internal
referential integrity
of the database was
* Data validation procedures used. checked as part of
the resource estimation.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Site In 2012, a Golder
visits * Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Associates geologist
Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. was delegated by the
Competent Person to
inspect the Desert
* If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why Scheelite site as
this is the case. part of the resource
estimation process.
A delegate was used
due to logistical
issues at the time.
The inspection reviewed
the drilling and sampling
process and confirmed
the site and data
were accurately represented
in reports of prior
owners and the drillhole
database. The delegate
visited all Pilot
Mountain deposit sites
at this time.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Geological The geology of the
interpretation * Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the deposit was interpreted
geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. using logged lithology
and sample analyses
to define zones of
* Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. mineralised skarn.
The area is commonly
faulted resulting
* The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on and numerous discontinuous
Mineral Resource estimation. blocks. Detailed modelling
of the fault blocks
was not possible at
* The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral the current drill
Resource estimation. spacing.
The resource classification
* The factors affecting continuity both of grade and reflects this uncertainty.
geology.
The geological interpretation
along strike and up
dip is confined by
the drilling and model
extent.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Dimensions The deposit is identified
* The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource in drilling over a
expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan 4 km by 4 km area.
width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower Discontinuous mineralisation
limits of the Mineral Resource. has been identified
over 80 m vertically
from subcrop.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Estimation The Mineral Resource
and modelling * The nature and appropriateness of the estimation estimated was based
techniques technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including on drill holes available
treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, as of 26 April 2017.
interpolation parameters and maximum distance of
extrapolation from data points. If a computer Resources were estimated
assisted estimation method was chosen include a using an Inverse Distance
description of computer software and parameters used. cubed algorithm. Grades
for WO(3) , Mo, Zn,
Pb and Cu were estimated.
* The availability of check estimates, previous Only WO(3) had sufficient
estimates and/or mine production records and whether numbers of analyses
the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate to provide a reliable
account of such data. result. The estimation
of the other analytes
provides an indication
* The assumptions made regarding recovery of of the grade that
by-products. many be attained if
further sampling was
undertaken.
* Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade
variables of economic significance (e.g. sulfur for A three-pass estimation
acid mine drainage characterisation). plan was used with
an octant based search.
The second and third
* In the case of block model interpolation, the block passes using progressively
size in relation to the average sample spacing and larger search neighbourhoods
the search employed. to enable the estimation
of blocks which remained
un-estimated following
* Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining the preceding passes.
units. Blocks based on geology
and a single analysis
result were assigned
* Any assumptions about correlation between variables. the grade of the analysis.
Block discretisation
* Description of how the geological interpretation was was set to 3 (X) by
used to control the resource estimates. 3 (Y) by 3 (Z) to
estimate grades of
25 m by 25 m by 5
* Discussion of basis for using or not using grade m parent blocks. Sub-cells
cutting or capping. of 5 m by 5 m by 1
m received the parent
cell estimate.
* The process of validation, the checking process used,
the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and A minimum of 2 composites
use of reconciliation data if available. and a maximum of 32
composites (Pass 1)
The same parameters
were used for each
analyte to maintain
any statistical relationship
between them.
Length-weighting was
applied to compensate
for variations in
composite length for
the data used in the
estimation.
No high grade outlier
samples were identified
that required restraining
or cutting.
The estimation was
constrained by the
interpreted geology
and performed by mineralised
domain code which
separates individual
mineralised domains.
The estimation was
validated statistically
comparing the average
composite grade to
the block estimate
grades on a domain
basis The model was
also validated visually
against the drill
data. The validation
showed the model to
be a robust representation
of the drill data
and geological interpretation.
The resource block
model is Garnet_1705.bmf
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Moisture Tonnages are estimated
* Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or on a dry basis.
with natural moisture, and the method of
determination of the moisture content.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Cut-off Modelling of the mineralised
parameters * The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality zones used a nominal
parameters applied. 2000 ppm WO(3) edge
cut off, but relied
more on geology.
The resource has been
reported at a range
of cut off grades.
No mining or financial
analysis has been
undertaken on the
deposit to validate
this figure.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Mining No mining assumptions
factors * Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, have been incorporated
or assumptions minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if into the resource
applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always estimate. The deposit
necessary as part of the process of determining contains near surface
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction mineralisation and
to consider potential mining methods, but the as such it could be
assumptions made regarding mining methods and anticipated that preliminary
parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not mining will be by
always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this open pit methods.
should be reported with an explanation of the basis
of the mining assumptions made.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Metallurgical No metallurgical factors
factors * The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding or assumptions have
or assumptions metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as been incorporated
part of the process of determining reasonable into the resource
prospects for eventual economic extraction to estimate.
consider potential metallurgical methods, but the
assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment
processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral
Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is
the case, this should be reported with an explanation
of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Environmental Preliminary investigations
factors * Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process by the tenement holder
or assumptions residue disposal options. It is always necessary as have not identified
part of the process of determining reasonable any environmental
prospects for eventual economic extraction to impacts from conceptual
consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining operations
mining and processing operation. While at this stage which would influence
the determination of potential environmental impacts, the cost base or the
particularly for a greenfields project, may not viability of mining
always be well advanced, the status of early of these resources.
consideration of these potential environmental
impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have
not been considered this should be reported with an
explanation of the environmental assumptions made.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Bulk No Garnet samples
density * Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis have been assessed
for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, for dry bulk density.
whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, Dry Bulk Density values
the nature, size and representativeness of the were obtained from
samples. 720 samples of core
from the Desert Scheelite
drilling program.
* The bulk density for bulk material must have been These were statistically
measured by methods that adequately account for void analysed by lithology
spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and and resource domains.
differences between rock and alteration zones within
the deposit. Average in-situ dry
bulk density values
were assigned to the
* Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used mineralised skarn
in the evaluation process of the different materials. (2.9 tm-3) and waste
(2.5 tm-3) based on
the Desert Scheelite
data.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Classification The Garnet resource
* The basis for the classification of the Mineral estimation is classified
Resources into varying confidence categories. as Inferred. Drill
hole spacing and estimate
confidence form the
* Whether appropriate account has been taken of all basis of the block
relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in classification. Uncertainty
tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, in the assigned bulk
confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, density also contributes.
quality, quantity and distribution of the data).
* Whether the result appropriately reflects the
Competent Person's view of the deposit.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Audits At this stage of the
or reviews * The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral project no external
Resource estimates. audits have been undertaken.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Discussion The Competent Person
of relative * Where appropriate a statement of the relative considers the resource
accuracy/ accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource to be a robust global
confidence estimate using an approach or procedure deemed estimate of the data
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the available.
application of statistical or geostatistical
procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the The integrity of the
resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such historical raw data
an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative cannot be guaranteed
discussion of the factors that could affect the other than to state
relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. that the data is consistent
with the recent drilling
and the geology is
* The statement should specify whether it relates to consistent with the
global or local estimates, and, if local, state the type and style of
relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to mineralisation.
technical and economic evaluation. Documentation
should include assumptions made and the procedures There is no production
used. data against which
to compare the estimate.
* These statements of relative accuracy and confidence
of the estimate should be compared with production
data, where available.
---------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report Desert Scheelite Resource 2014
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Sampling The Desert Scheelite
techniques * Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, resource is defined
random chips, or specific specialised industry by 86 diamond drill
standard measurement tools appropriate to the holes comprising 15
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma drilled in 2012 and
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These the remainder drilled
examples should not be taken as limiting the broad in the 1970s. The
meaning of sampling. 2012 drill core was
oriented. The 2012
drilling was sampled
* Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample by half core.
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any
measurement tools or systems used. Core samples are weighed,
dried and crushed
to better than 70%
* Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that passing a 2 mm screen.
are Material to the Public Report. A split of up to 1000
g is taken and pulverised
to better than 85%
* In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done passing a 75 micron
this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse screen. This method
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples is appropriate for
from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g rock chip or drill
charge for fire assay'). In other cases more core samples. The
explanation may be required, such as where there is pulp sample is digested
coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. in acid and analysed
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg by inductively coupled
submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed plasma - atomic emission
information. spectroscopy (ICP-AES).
Sampling and analysis
for the 1970s drilling
is unknown.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Drilling Diamond drilled core
techniques * Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole was the drill method
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) used for the 2011/2012
and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard program. Tri-cone
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or rotary drilling was
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by used in the first
what method, etc). 100 ft of holes with
poor ground conditions.
The earlier 1970s
drilling method is
unknown, but based
on sample intervals
is believed to be
diamond coring also.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Drill Sample recovery is
sample * Method of recording and assessing core and chip recorded for each
recovery sample recoveries and results assessed. logged interval. The
core recovery is acceptable.
Any relationship between
* Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure core recovery and
representative nature of the samples. grade has not been
investigated.
* Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery
and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred
due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse
material.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Logging The 15 drill holes
* Whether core and chip samples have been geologically from 2011/2012 have
and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to information for collar,
support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, survey, assay, lithology,
mining studies and metallurgical studies. geotech, weathering,
structure, veining,
and density. Older
* Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in holes contain only
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. collar survey and
assay data. Geological
logging data is based
* The total length and percentage of the relevant on full examination.
intersections logged.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Sub-sampling The 2012 samples were
techniques * If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half core cut and
and sample half or all core taken. weighed. The core
preparation half with orientation
markings was retained,
* If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary the other half was
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. submitted for analysis.
* For all sample types, the nature, quality and
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.
* Quality control procedures adopted for all
sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.
* Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in situ material collected,
including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
* Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain
size of the material being sampled.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Quality Field standards and
of assay * The nature, quality and appropriateness of the duplicates were submitted
data assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether with the core 2012
and laboratory the technique is considered partial or total. samples. No material
tests bias was detected
in the standards.
* For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF Duplicates samples
instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining showed good repeatability.
the analysis including instrument make and model, Flex-It downhole survey
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their measurements were
derivation, etc. validated in two holes
using a Gyro survey
tool and found to
* Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg be consistent.
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory Validation of the
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie 1970s assay results
lack of bias) and precision have been established. was undertaken by
twinning four of the
older holes.
The data quality for
the estimation of
WO3 is acceptable
but further drill
hole twinning is recommended
to better determine
the accuracy of
historic silver (Ag)
and copper (Cu) data.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Verification A 5% check of the
of sampling * The verification of significant intersections by database against laboratory
and assaying either independent or alternative company personnel. certificates and geological
logs was undertaken
Historical level plans
* The use of twinned holes. and N-S cross sections
of the resource detailing
geology data and interpretation
* Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, as well as assay results
data verification, data storage (physical and for drilling conducted
electronic) protocols. by Union Carbide Corporation
in the 1970s are available.
They indicate a greater
* Discuss any adjustment to assay data. breadth of data collection
and geological understanding
than provided in the
electronic database.
The initial seven
holes drilled by Black
Fire Minerals in 2011/2012
were designed to verify
a sample of the pre-existing
drilling.
The 2012 drilling
is consistent with
the 1970s data.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Location Hole collar co-ordinates
of data * Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill are referenced to
points holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine NAD 83 (zone 11N).
workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource Collar locations from
estimation. 1970s were digitised
from maps translated
to NAD83. Any historic
* Specification of the grid system used. collars that could
be located in addition
to the 2011/2012 drilling
* Quality and adequacy of topographic control. were surveyed by differential
GPS.
The topography was
based on 10 ft contours
from the most recent
USA topographic survey.
The topographic surface
was adjusted to the
surveyed drill hole
collars.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Data Exploration results
spacing * Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. are not being reported.
and distribution
Drill holes are spaced
* Whether the data spacing and distribution is roughly 30 feet apart
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and on 100 foot spaced
grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource sections.
and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
* Whether sample compositing has been applied.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Orientation The Desert Scheelite
of data * Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased deposit trends dominantly
in relation sampling of possible structures and the extent to east-west and dips
to geological which this is known, considering the deposit type. variably 70-80 .
structure The majority of holes
have been drilled
* If the relationship between the drilling orientation vertically resulting
and the orientation of key mineralised structures is in a shallow core
considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this to mineralisation
should be assessed and reported if material. angle. The first seven
of the 2011/2012 holes
were also drilled
vertically to validate
the earlier drilling.
The remaining eight
2011/2012 holes were
angled to increase
the mineralisation
intersection angle
providing a more representative
sample..
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Sample Chain of custody details
security * The measures taken to ensure sample security. for the 1970s drilling
are unavailable.
The chain of custody
for the 2011/2012
drill samples was
reviewed on site by
the CP delegate and
deemed to be adequate.
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Audits A 5% check of the
or reviews * The results of any audits or reviews of sampling database against laboratory
techniques and data. certificates and geological
logs was undertaken.
The referential integrity
of the database was
confirmed prior to
modelling the resource.
At this stage of the
project no other independent
external audits have
been undertaken
------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Mineral The Pilot Mountain
tenement * Type, reference name/number, location and ownership Project comprises
and land including agreements or material issues with third 154 unpatented Mineral
tenure parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, Claims over 12.9 km(2)
status overriding royalties, native title interests, located on the eastern
historical sites, wilderness or national park and flank of Pilot Mountain,
environmental settings. 250 km southeast of
the city of Reno and
20km east of the town
* The security of the tenure held at the time of of Mina, in Nevada,
reporting along with any known impediments to USA.
obtaining a licence to operate in the area. At the time of writing
the tenements are
100% controlled by
Black Fire Minerals
Limited.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Exploration The Desert Scheelite
done * Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other deposit discovery
by other parties. date is not known.
parties The deposit was drilled
by Duval in the early
1970s and subsequently
by the Union Carbide
Corporation (UCC)
in the late 1970s
The program comprised
71 vertical holes
which are assumed
to be diamond core
totalling approximately
14,600 m, on sections
spaced at 50 -100
feet (15 - 30 m),
to depths as great
as 300 m. The mineralisation
was exposed by UCC
in a small trial pit
excavated in 1981
After acquiring the
project in 2011 BFE
completed a further
15 diamond core holes
totalling 3,047 m.
This program included
twinning, in-filling
and angled holes which
provided geological
and statistical data
verification, improved
geological interpretation
and enabled the estimation
of resources and JORC-compliant
reporting by Golder
Associates, for BFE,
in 2012.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Geology The Desert Scheelite
* Deposit type, geological setting and style of deposit consists of
mineralisation. skarn and calc-silicate
altered marble bodies
developed principally
within the dominantly
carbonate upper member
of the Triassic Luning
Formation, and to
a lesser degree in
thinner carbonate
beds within the dominantly
metaclastic middle
and lower members
of the Luning Formation.
Intrusion of a biotite
quartz monzonite stock
during the Cretaceous
led to contact metamorphism
of adjacent carbonate
units to marble and
pelitic clastic units
to hornfels. Mineralised
skarn and calc-silicate
altered rock was locally
formed in marble and
to a lesser extent
in calcareous meta-clastics
during the latter
phases of emplacement
of the stock.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Drill Exploration results
hole * A summary of all information material to the are not being reported.
Information understanding of the exploration results including a
tabulation of the following information for all Details of the drilling
Material drill holes: used to define the
resources are included
in the resource estimation
o easting and northing documentation.
of the drill hole collar
o elevation or RL (Reduced
Level - elevation above
sea level in metres) of
the drill hole collar
o dip and azimuth of the
hole
o down hole length and
interception depth
o hole length.
* If the exclusion of this information is justified on
the basis that the information is not Material and
this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person
should clearly explain why this is the case.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Data Exploration results
aggregation * In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging are not being reported.
methods techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations
(eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are
usually Material and should be stated.
* Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths
of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade
results, the procedure used for such aggregation
should be stated and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
* The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
equivalent values should be clearly stated.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Relationship Exploration results
between * These relationships are particularly important in the are not being reported.
mineralisation reporting of Exploration Results.
widths
and intercept
lengths * If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to
the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be
reported.
* If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are
reported, there should be a clear statement to this
effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known').
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Diagrams Exploration results
* Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and are not being reported.
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any
significant discovery being reported These should
include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional
views.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Balanced Exploration results
reporting * Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration are not being reported.
Results is not practicable, representative reporting
of both low and high grades and/or widths should be
practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Other Exploration results
substantive * Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, are not being reported.
exploration should be reported including (but not limited to):
data geological observations; geophysical survey results;
geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk
density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock
characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminating substances.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
Further Exploration results
work * The nature and scale of planned further work (eg are not being reported.
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).
* Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible
extensions, including the main geological
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided
this information is not commercially sensitive.
---------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------
This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange
END
DRLEADSFAAFXEFF
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
May 22, 2017 02:00 ET (06:00 GMT)
1 Year Thor Energy Chart |
1 Month Thor Energy Chart |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
