We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type |
---|---|---|---|
IperionX Ltd (PK) | USOTC:TAOFF | OTCMarkets | Common Stock |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 2.55 | 1.85 | 4,102.87 | 0.00 | 19:00:01 |
Exhibit
|
Description
|
|
Press Release
|
IPERIONX LIMITED
|
||
(registrant)
|
||
Date: August 31, 2023
|
By: |
/s/ Gregory Swan
|
Name: |
Gregory Swan
|
|
Title: |
Chief Financial Officer
|
PRESS RELEASE | NASDAQ: IPX | ASX: IPX
August 28, 2023
|
■ |
The Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation has confirmed that all regulatory permit requirements for the Titan Critical Minerals Project have been met by IperionX
|
■ |
The Titan Project is now fully permitted for development and operations
|
■ |
Titan is a vital, fully permitted, U.S. critical mineral project - positioned to make a significant impact to reduce the acute reliance on critical mineral imports from foreign nations
|
■ |
Positive results of feasibility level metallurgical test work confirm a material increase in the recoveries of higher value natural rutile, zircon and rare earth mineral products
|
■ |
Successful completion of metallurgical test work advances a major long lead-time for project development
|
■ |
Multiple strategic financing and offtake partners have demonstrated major interest in Titan’s valuable titanium, rare earth and zircon critical minerals
|
■ |
A major Japanese conglomerate is sole funding bulk sample and due diligence test work at Titan to advance potential sales offtake and development financing
|
■ |
There are a wide range of U.S government funding opportunities and incentives to support feasibility and the full development of the Titan Project
|
North Carolina
|
Tennessee
|
Virginia
|
Utah
|
129 W Trade Street, Suite 1405
Charlotte, NC 28202
|
279 West Main Street
Camden, TN 38320
|
1080 Confroy Drive
South Boston, VA 24592
|
1782 W 2300 S
West Valley City, UT 84119
|
Product
|
Scoping Study Recovery
|
Feasibility Study Recovery
|
|
Rare Earths
|
77%
|
83%
|
|
Rutile – Titanium
|
62%
|
67%
|
|
Ilmenite – Titanium
|
84%
|
80%
|
|
Premium Zircon
|
69%
|
78%
|
TiO2
|
Fe2O3
|
SiO2
|
Al2O3
|
Cr2O3
|
MgO
|
MnO
|
ZrO2
|
P2O5
|
V2O5
|
Nb2O5
|
SO3
|
CaO
|
K2O
|
U
|
Th
|
||
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
ppm
|
ppm
|
||
Ilmenite
|
65
|
28
|
1.5
|
1.3
|
0.07
|
0.15
|
0.8
|
0.1
|
0.2
|
0.1
|
0.1
|
0.01
|
0.11
|
0.04
|
24
|
126
|
|
Rutile
|
91
|
3.7
|
1.8
|
0.8
|
0.096
|
0.02
|
0.09
|
0.9
|
0.1
|
0.2
|
0.46
|
0.06
|
0.05
|
0.05
|
35
|
86
|
|
Zircon
|
0.2
|
0.1
|
33
|
0.2
|
0.004
|
0.01
|
0.01
|
67
|
0.1
|
0.01
|
0.01
|
0.02
|
0.02
|
0.02
|
443
|
122
|
Ce
|
Dy
|
Er
|
Eu
|
Gd
|
Ho
|
La
|
Lu
|
Nd
|
Pr
|
Sc
|
Sm
|
Tb
|
Tm
|
Y
|
Yb
|
Total
|
||
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
%
|
||
REMC (%)
|
40.9
|
1.5
|
0.7
|
0.3
|
2.4
|
0.3
|
19.1
|
0.0
|
18.4
|
5.1
|
0.0
|
3.4
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
7.1
|
0.5
|
100.0
|
Company2
|
Location
|
Project Status
|
Nd + Pr2 (%)
|
Dy + Tb3 (%)
|
|
MP Materials
|
U.S.A.
|
Production
|
~16.3
|
<0.1
|
|
Lynas
|
Australia
|
Production
|
~24.4
|
~0.5
|
|
Meteoric
|
Brazil
|
Inferred Resource
|
~22.9
|
~1.1
|
|
Arafura
|
Australia
|
DFS
|
~26.4
|
~0.4
|
|
Lindian
|
Malawi
|
Inferred Resource
|
~20.3
|
<0.1
|
|
IperionX
|
U.S.A.
|
Scoping Study
|
~23.5
|
~1.8
|
Product
|
Scoping Study Recovery
|
Feasibility Study Recovery
|
|
Rare Earths
|
77%
|
83%
|
|
Rutile
|
62%
|
67%
|
|
Ilmenite
|
84%
|
80%
|
|
Premium Zircon
|
69%
|
78%
|
1. |
Operating
|
2. |
Feed Preparation
|
3. |
Wet Concentration
|
4. |
Rare Earth Mineral Concentration
|
5. |
Concentrate Upgrading
|
6. |
Mineral Separation Plant
|
Company
|
Source
|
||
MP Materials
|
2022 Annual Report (SEC Form 10K)
|
||
Lynas
|
ASX Announcement dated August 6th 2018 – 60% increase to Mt Weld Ore Reserves
|
||
Meteoric
|
ASX Announcement dated May 1st 2023 – Caldeira REE project Maiden Mineral Resource
|
||
Arafura
|
ASX Announcement dated February 7th 2019 – Nolans DFS Delivers Robust Project Economics
|
||
Lindian
|
ASX Announcement dated August 3rd 2023 – Lindian Reports Maiden Mineral Resource
|
Forward Looking Statements
Information included in this release constitutes forward-looking statements. Often, but not always, forward looking statements can generally be identified by
the use of forward-looking words such as “may”, “will”, “expect”, “intend”, “plan”, “estimate”, “anticipate”, “continue”, and “guidance”, or other similar words and may include, without limitation, statements regarding plans, strategies
and objectives of management, anticipated production or construction commencement dates and expected costs or production outputs.
Forward looking statements inherently involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, performance, and
achievements to differ materially from any future results, performance, or achievements. Relevant factors may include, but are not limited to, changes in commodity prices, foreign exchange fluctuations and general economic conditions,
increased costs and demand for production inputs, the speculative nature of exploration and project development, including the risks of obtaining necessary licenses and permits and diminishing quantities or grades of reserves, the Company’s
ability to comply with the relevant contractual terms to access the technologies, commercially scale its closed-loop titanium production processes, or protect its intellectual property rights, political and social risks, changes to the
regulatory framework within which the Company operates or may in the future operate, environmental conditions including extreme weather conditions, recruitment and retention of personnel, industrial relations issues and litigation.
Forward looking statements are based on the Company and its management’s good faith assumptions relating to the financial, market, regulatory and other relevant
environments that will exist and affect the Company’s business and operations in the future. The Company does not give any assurance that the assumptions on which forward looking statements are based will prove to be correct, or that the
Company’s business or operations will not be affected in any material manner by these or other factors not foreseen or foreseeable by the Company or management or beyond the Company’s control.
Although the Company attempts and has attempted to identify factors that would cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those disclosed in forward
looking statements, there may be other factors that could cause actual results, performance, achievements, or events not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended, and many events are beyond the reasonable control of the Company.
Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward looking statements. Forward looking statements in these materials speak only at the date of issue. Subject to any continuing obligations under applicable law or any
relevant stock exchange listing rules, in providing this information the Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any of the forward-looking statements or to advise of any change in events, conditions or
circumstances on which any such statement is based.
Competent Persons Statement
The information in this announcement that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled and/or reviewed by Mr. Adam Karst, P.G., who
is a Competent Person. Mr. Karst is an independent consultant to IperionX Limited. Mr. Karst is a Registered Member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration (SME) which is a Recognized Overseas Professional Organization (ROPO) as
well as a Professional Geologist in the state of Tennessee. Mr. Karst has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style and type of mineralization present at the Titan Project area and to the activity that 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” (the 2012 JORC Code). Mr. Karst consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters
based on this information in the form and context in which it appears.
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary
|
||
Sampling techniques
|
• Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific
specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of
sampling.
• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the
appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.
• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public
Report.
• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively
simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that
has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
|
• A roto-sonic drill rig, the Geoprobe 5140LS, utilized a 10 foot core barrel to obtain direct 10-foot
samples of the unconsolidated geological formations hosting the mineralization in the project area. All holes were drilled vertically which is essentially perpendicular to the mineralization. The sonic cores were used to produce a
total of ~20,000kg of bulk material for metallurgical test work. Metallurgical test work samples consisted of one main bulk sample and three variability samples. The main bulk sample of 12.7 wet metric tonnes was composed of ~30% Upper
McNairy and ~70% Lower McNairy ore, representing the approximate average blend of the first five years of production. Three bulk composite samples of 2-3 wet metric tonnes were prepared for the variability test work, each comprised of
different ratios of Upper McNairy and Lower McNairy material to represent the variation in geo-metallurgical characteristics expected within the Mineral Resource.
• Feed preparation was conducted at IperionX’s operational Mineral Demonstration Facility (“MDF”) at
the Titan Project near Camden, TN, with the assistance of Mineral Technologies personnel. The remaining beneficiation and separation of the valuable critical minerals was completed by Mineral Technologies, first at MT’s Florida
metallurgical test facility in U.S., and then at MT’s Queensland metallurgical test facility in Australia. The sand fraction, containing the valuable minerals (nominal <2.0mm, >0.045mm), is separated from slimes (<45µm) and
oversize waste (>2.0mm).The valuable minerals contained in the sand fraction are recovered in a WCP using a conventional multi-stage gravity separation circuit. The recovered valuable minerals constitute the total Critcal Mineral
Concentrate (CMC), which is screened at nominal 130µm to prepare coarse and fine CMC streams. The fine CMC is subjected to mechanical attrition and conditioned with specific reagents in preparation for processing by conventional froth
flotation and further gravity concentration. Products are a salable, final Rare Earth Mineral Concentrate (REMC) product, and a fine flotation CMC. The fine flotation CMC is processed by wet gravity separation to produce a zircon and
titanium rich stream to feed the Mineral Separation Plant. The coarse and fine CMC are fractionated by multiple dry electrostatic and magnetic separation stages to produce final ilmenite and rutile products. The non-conductive
concentrate is processed by wet gravity then further dry electrostatic and magnetic separations to produce final zircon product.
• All assays are conducted by Bureau Veritas in Perth. Standard XRF mineral sand assays are used
except where individual rare earth elements (REE) are required. These samples undergo the XRF suite as well as Laser Ablation / ICP-MS for determination of individual REE. For mineralogy, QEMSCAN (Qualitative
Evaluation of Minerals by Scanning Electron Microscopy) analysis was conducted by SGS Lakefield in Canada.
|
||
Drilling techniques
|
• Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast,
auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
|
• ~20,000kg of bulk material was collected via roto-sonic drilling. To produce the required bulk
sample volume, multiple holes were drilled within in a 10m radius of previously drilled holes that were targeted for their specific geo-metallurgical characteristics. The core barrel utilized for this project is 6” in diameter. The core
barrel is retrieved from the ground and the samples are recovered directly from the barrel into 55-gallon drums. All holes are drilled vertically.
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary
|
||
Drill sample recovery
|
• Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results
assessed.
• 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
|
• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged
to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,
channel, etc) photography.
• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged.
|
• Samples are logged for lithological, geological, and mineralogical parameters in the field to help
aid in determining depositional environment, major geologic units, and mineralized zones. All samples are panned and estimates made for the %HM and %SL.
• Logging is both qualitative (sorting, color, lithology) and quantitative (estimation of %HM, %SL)
to confirm consistency with original drill sample.
• Total depth of the drillhole and sample interval is recorded. Samples are collected at regular (10
foot) intervals.
|
||
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation
|
• If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.
• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether
sampled wet or dry.
• 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.
|
• All assays are conducted by Bureau Veritas (formerly Ultra Trace) in Perth. Standard XRF mineral
sand suite assays are used except where individual rare earth elements (REE) are required. These samples undergo the XRF suite as well as Laser Ablation / ICP-MS for determination of individual REE. For mineralogy, QEMSCAN (Qualitative Evaluation of Minerals by Scanning Electron Microscopy) analysis was conducted by SGS Lakefield in Canada.
|
||
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests
|
• The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory
procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the
parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.
|
• The assay method for the REE was Laser Ablation Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry
(ICP-MS) and is considered total.
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary
|
||
Verification of sampling and assaying
|
• The verification of significant intersections by either independent or
alternative company personnel.
• The use of twinned holes.
• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data
storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
|
• No adjustments or calibrations were made to the primary analytical data reported for metallurgical
test work results for the purpose of reporting assay grades or mineralized intervals
|
||
Location of data points
|
• Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and
down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.
• Specification of the grid system used.
• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
|
• All drillholes are surveyed after drilling with a hand-held GPS unit and the X and Y coordinates
recorded in the project’s database by the field geologist. Elevation data for each collar has been determined using publicly available topographic data.
• The coordinate system used for the project is UTM (Zone16N).
|
||
Data spacing and distribution
|
• Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.
• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the
degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
|
• Not applicable.
|
||
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure
|
• Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible
structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type.
• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of
key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material.
|
• Work undertaken is of feasibility study level nature and representative of the critical mineral
deposit.
|
||
Sample security
|
• The measures taken to ensure sample security.
|
• Samples remain in the custody of the field geologist from time of collection until time of delivery
to the project’s temporary storage location which is a secure third-party storage unit.
• Samples are placed in rice bags and a red security tag secure the top. These tags are verified by
the lab to guarantee all sample bags are intact.
|
||
Audits or reviews
|
• The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.
|
• No third-party review of the sampling techniques employed have been conducted. Only internal
reviews and site visits by the Competent Person who is considered to have expertise in the drilling/sampling methods has been utilized.
|
Criteria
|
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary
|
||
Mineral tenement and land tenure status
|
• Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or
material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.
• The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known
impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.
|
• All areas reported are held under mining lease option agreements with mineral rights to owner.
Negotiations are ongoing to secure additional parcels within the deposits.
• No known impediments to obtaining a license to operate. License to operate is based on obtaining
land access through mining leases with individual landowners as well acquiring local, and State permits.
|
||
Exploration done by other parties
|
• Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.
|
• Several exploration campaigns have focused on this region over the past 60 years, with DuPont
reportedly being the first company to investigate this region, followed by Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation that had exploration success but never commenced mining. BHP Titanium Minerals had an interest in the region in the 1990’s and
Mineral Recovery Systems, a company associated with Altair International Inc., had significant activities in the region in the late 1990’s, including land acquisition, drilling and metallurgical studies.
|
||
Geology
|
• Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.
|
• The deposits are Cretaceous mineral sands deposits located in the Mississippi Embayment region of
the U.S. These deposits consist of reworked deltaic sediments hosting HM mineralization. The deposits overly other deeper marine sediments and are overlain by more recent fluvial sediments.
|
||
Drill hole Information
|
• A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration
results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:
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.
|
• Not applicable
|
||
Data aggregation methods
|
• In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging 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.
|
• Not applicable
|
Criteria |
JORC Code explanation
|
Commentary | ||
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths
|
• These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of
Exploration Results.
• 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’).
|
• Not applicable
|
||
Diagrams
|
• Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and 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.
|
• Not applicable
|
||
Balanced reporting
|
• Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration 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.
|
• The results of all metallurgical tests performed have been
reported on. No results have been excluded.
|
||
Other substantive exploration data
|
• Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported
including (but not limited to): 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.
|
• Not applicable
|
||
Further work
|
• The nature and scale of planned further work (eg 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.
|
• Not applicable
|
1 Year IperionX (PK) Chart |
1 Month IperionX (PK) 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