We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
| 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 : 3667K
Thor Mining PLC
13 December 2018
13 December 2018
THOR MINING PLC
INCREASED MINERAL RESOURCE ESTIMATE - PILOT MOUNTAIN NEVADA USA
The Board of Thor Mining Plc ("Thor" or the "Company") (AIM, ASX: THR), is pleased to announce an upgraded and increased mineral resource estimate containing tungsten, copper and now zinc, for the Desert Scheelite deposit at Pilot Mountain in Nevada USA.
Highlights:
-- The Desert Scheelite mineral resource estimate now comprises 10.7 million tonnes at 0.26% WO , 19.38 gram/tonne Silver (Ag), 0.15% copper (Cu), & 0.38% zinc (Zn) (above cut-off grade of 0.15% WO(3) ) (Refer to Table A below);
-- The upgraded mineral resource estimate represents a 6.5% increase in the scheelite inventory for Desert Scheelite, now containing 27,700 tonnes of WO (tungsten trioxide) 85% of which is in the Indicated category;
-- For the first time, the estimate includes zinc in the resource inventory, contributing an additional potential by-product stream to the project;
-- The planned flotation recovery process, currently being trialled, is likely to recover zinc sulphides into concentrate with minimal additional cost;
-- The resource inventory still has considerable growth potential via the Gun Metal and Good Hope deposits, as well as further potential upside at both Desert Scheelite and Garnet;
Mr Mick Billing, Executive Chairman, commented:
"This addition to the resource estimate at Pilot Mountain further enhances the potential of this exciting project."
"Pilot Mountain hosts a large and, in the directors' view, valuable tungsten resource in the USA, where there has been no primary production of tungsten for some years, despite being classified as a critical mineral by the US Department of the Interior."
"I look forward to outlining the next steps for this key Company project in the coming weeks. This update will complement comprehensive updates across all areas of our operations in what is a highly proactive period for Thor."
"In this regard I also expect to provide updates to the market in respect of Molyhil commercialisation, the Bonya project review exercise (including vanadium) and the latest developments in respect of the Company's Kapunda copper project interest."
Pilot Mountain Resource Summary
Table A: Pilot Mountain Resource Summary 2018 (JORC 2012) - 100% owned by Thor Mining Plc
Hot Features
Premium
Resource WO(3) Ag Cu Zn
MT Grade Contained Grade Contained Grade Contained Grade Contained
% metal g/t metal % metal % metal
(t) (t) (t) (t)
------------ ----------- ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Garnet Indicated - -
------------
Inferred 1.83 0.36 6,590
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Sub Total 1.83 0.36 6,590
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Desert
Scheelite Indicated 9.01 0.26 23,400 20.73 187 0.15 13,200 0.41 37,100
------------
Inferred 1.69 0.25 4,300 12.24 21 0.16 2,800 0.19 3,200
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Sub Total 10.70 0.26 27,700 19.38 207 0.15 16,000 0.38 40,300
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Summary Indicated 9.01 0.26 23,400
------------
Inferred 3.53 0.31 10,890
------------------------ ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Pilot Mountain
Total 12.53 0.27 34,290
------------------------- ------ ----- ---------- ------ --------- ------ --------- ----- ---------
Note:
-- All figures are rounded to reflect appropriate levels of confidence. Apparent differences may occur due to rounding
-- Cut-off grade 0.15% WO
-- Garnet deposit resource reported 22 May 2017. The Company is not aware of any information or data which would materially affect this previously announced resource estimate, and all assumptions and technical parameters relevant to the estimate remain unchanged.
Zinc Exploration Target
Zinc and copper are also present at the other three Pilot Mountain deposits; Garnet, Good Hope and Gun Metal however zinc data are not included in the historic database and the 2017 drilling zinc data alone are insufficient to estimate an inferred zinc resource.
On the basis of the 2017 drill data, an exploration target* for the Garnet deposit is estimated as;
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.
Summary of Resource Estimate and Reporting Criteria
The work is an update of the resource completed by Golder Associates in 2012. The 2018 resource update was undertaken by Resource Evaluation Services (RES)
Drilling of the Desert Scheelite deposit has been conducted in campaigns since 1972, with the most recent drilling completed in 2017. The update to the resource includes four new diamond drill holes completed by Thor and seven additional drill holes added to the database from historical sources.
The drill hole database used for the Desert Scheelite resource estimation was provided to RES as the MS Access database ds_drillhole_database.mdb. The referential integrity of the supplied database was confirmed, and the database validated against the 2012 resource database. Adjustments to the database were made by RES correcting the imperial to metric conversion and standardising the database to millimetre precision.
The Vulcan ISIS database ds112018.geo.isis was created by RES for the update. The resource model update is based on 99 drill holes for a total of 18645 m, spaning 750 m east to west and 300 m in a north to south.
Most of the modelling data from the Golder 2012 model was available to RES including the topographic and mineralisation models.
The mineralisation wireframe models were adjusted to account for the additional drilling. The mineralised skarns were separated into several domains representing structural and geological differences. The Desert Scheelite deposit has been modelled as several sub-vertical lenses. The Desert Scheelite deposit trends dominantly east-west and dips variably 70-80 .
The mineralised skarns have been modelled using a 0.1% WO(3) cut-off and geological logs when available. The quartz monzonite, tertiary volcanics, metaclastites, hornfels and Top of Fresh Rock have been interpreted using the logged stratigraphy codes. The mineralised zones were used to define spatial regions for statistical and geostatistical analysis.
For statistical data analysis, exploration data was composited to 1.52 m (5 ft) downhole lengths. Imprecise imperial to metric conversion factors resulted in a significant proportion of short composites. To mitigate this issue length weighted raw samples were used in the final analysis and estimation.
Analysis was based on four assay variables: WO(3) , Ag, Cu and Zn. The composites were flagged to the geological interpretations and statistical analysis performed by domain.
Downhole and directional grade variography was completed for all domains to provide parameters for the Ordinary Kriging method used for resource estimation. The spherical scheme model was used to obtain all variogram parameters from the experimental variograms. The modelled variograms have directions consistent with the orientations of the lodes and exhibit a low angle plunge in the main skarn.
Four estimation passes using increasing search distances were employed to interpolate all the blocks within the skarn and waste domains. The fourth pass was used to establish inferred resource down dip of the deposit by increasing the search ellipse size in the down dip direction.
Density values were applied to model based on the Golder 2012 work.
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.
Enquiries:
Mick Billing +61 (8) 7324 1935 Thor Mining PLC Executive Chairman
Ray Ridge +61 (8) 7324 1935 Thor Mining PLC CFO/Company
Secretary
Colin Aaronson/ +44 (0) 207 383 Grant Thornton UK Nominated Adviser
Richard Tonthat/ 5100 LLP
Ben Roberts
Nick Emerson +44 (0) 1483 413 SI Capital Ltd Joint Broker
500
David Hignell +44 (0)20 3861 Northland Capital Joint Broker
/ Rob Rees 6625 Partners Limited
Tim Blythe/ Camilla +44 (0) 207 138 Blytheweigh Financial PR
Horsfall 3222
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.
About Thor Mining PLC
Thor Mining PLC (AIM, ASX: THR) is a resources company quoted on the AIM Market of the London Stock Exchange and on ASX in Australia.
Thor holds 100% of the advanced Molyhil tungsten project in the Northern Territory of Australia, for which an updated feasibility study in August 2018(1) suggested attractive returns.
Thor also holds 100% of the Pilot Mountain tungsten project in Nevada USA which has a JORC 2012 Indicated and Inferred Resources Estimate(2) on 2 of the 4 known deposits. The US Department of the Interior has confirmed that tungsten, the primary resource mineral at Pilot Mountain, has been included in the final list of Critical Minerals 2018.
Thor is also acquiring up to a 60% interest Australian copper development company Environmental Copper Recovery SA Pty Ltd, which in turn holds rights to earn up to a 75% interest in the mineral rights and claims over the resource(3) on the portion of the historic Kapunda copper mine in South Australia recoverable by way of in situ recovery.
Thor has an interest in Hawkstone Mining Limited, an Australian ASX listed company with a 100% Interest in a Lithium project in Arizona, USA.
Finally, Thor also holds a production royalty entitlement from the Spring Hill Gold project of:
-- A$6 per ounce of gold produced from the Spring Hill tenements where the gold produced is sold for up to A$1,500 per ounce; and
-- A$14 per ounce of gold produced from the Spring Hill tenements where the gold produced is sold for amounts over A$1,500 per ounce.
Notes
(1) Refer ASX and AIM announcement of 23 August 2018
(2) Refer AIM announcement of 22 May 2017 and ASX announcement of 23 May 2017
(3) Refer AIM announcement of 10 February 2016 and ASX announcement of 12 February 2018
Refer AIM announcement of 26 February 2016 and ASX announcement of 29 February 2017
Compliance with the JORC Code Assessment Criteria
The JORC Code (2012) describes a number of criteria, which must be addressed in the documentation of Mineral Resource estimates, prior to public release of the information. These criteria provide a means of assessing whether or not the data inventory used in the estimate is adequate for that purpose. The resource estimate stated in this document was based on the criteria set out in Table 1 of that Code. These criteria have been discussed in the main body of the document and are summarised below. Only sections relevant to the reported resource have been addressed. The JORC Code Assessment Criteria in the following table are italicised.
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data (Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques The recent drilling used
* Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, reverse circulation and
random chips, or specific specialised industry diamond drilling to obtain
standard measurement tools appropriate to the samples. From the RC drilling
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma 2 kg subsamples were taken
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These using rotary splitter
examples should not be taken as limiting the broad for logging and laboratory
meaning of sampling. analysis. Chip tray samples
were collected logged
and photographed. Drill
* Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample core was sampled on geological
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any intervals.
measurement tools or systems used. The recent Desert Scheelite
RC drill holes were sampled
at 2.5-foot intervals.
* Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that Diamond drill holes are
are Material to the Public Report. sampled on geological
intervals.
The historic holes have
* In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done samples recorded over
this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse intervals from 1 to 50
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples feet, most commonly 5
from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g feet.
charge for fire assay'). In other cases more Sampling and analysis
explanation may be required, such as where there is details for the 1970s
coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. drilling are unknown.
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg
submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed
information.
Drilling techniques The earlier 1970s drilling
* Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole method is diamond and
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) "rotary", believed to
and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard be percussion with annular
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or return.
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by The recent drilling was
what method, etc). RC using a face sampling
hammer
Drill sample Sample recoveries have
recovery * Method of recording and assessing core and chip not been systematically
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 Recent drilling
* Whether core and chip samples have been geologically program
and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to have information for
support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, collar,
mining studies and metallurgical studies. survey, assay,
lithology,
weathering. Geology of
* Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in the hole cuttings was
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. qualitative logged and
photographed 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 2 kg subsamples were taken
techniques * If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, using a rotary splitter.
and sample half or all core taken. This size sample is considered
preparation representative considering
the rock type and grain
* If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary size.
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.
Quality of Recent drill samples analysis
assay data * The nature, quality and appropriateness of the was conducted by ALS Chemex
and laboratory assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether in Reno. Sample and assay
tests the technique is considered partial or total. method has previously
been approved by independent
resource estimate practitioner.
* For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF QA/QC protocol has been
instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining adopted using certified
the analysis including instrument make and model, reference material; certified
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their blank material and field
derivation, etc.Ba, Mo duplicate samples inserted
at a rate of 15% or better.
Validation of the 1970s
* Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg assay results was undertaken
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory by twinning of four of
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie the older holes with the
lack of bias) and precision have been established. recent drilling. WO3 grades
are comparable. Cu and
Ag are anomalous and require
further investigation.
Verification Twin holes were used to
of sampling * The verification of significant intersections by check the veracity of
and assaying either independent or alternative company personnel. the historical drilling.
The compiled drilling
data was checked for internal
* The use of twinned holes. consistency as part of
the resource estimation.
Database Analytical data
* Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, for the recent programs
data verification, data storage (physical and were validated against
electronic) protocols. laboratory reports.
* Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of Hole collar co-ordinates
data points * Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill are referenced to NAD
holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine 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 were
* Specification of the grid system used. cross checked against
several maps.
For the recent drilling,
* Quality and adequacy of topographic control. 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 spacing Exploration results are
and distribution * Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. not being reported.
Drill holes are inconsistently
spaced at 10 m to 50 m
* Whether the data spacing and distribution is on SE-NW sections nominally
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and 100 m apart
grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource
and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
* Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation The Desert Scheelite
of data in * Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased mineralisation
relation to sampling of possible structures and the extent to is hosted in steeply north
geological which this is known, considering the deposit type. dipping sediments. The
structure 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 security Chain of custody details
* The measures taken to ensure sample security. for the 1970s drilling
are unavailable.
The chain of custody for
the recent drill program
at Desert Scheelite was
reviewed on site by the
CP delegate and deemed
to be adequate.
Samples are under the
supervision of the site
geologist and stored in
a secure, locked shed
prior to shipment to the
laboratory.
Audits or At this stage of the project
reviews * The results of any audits or reviews of sampling no other independent external
techniques and data. audits have been undertaken.
-------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results (Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement Thor Mining plc hold
and land tenure * Type, reference name/number, location and ownership 100%of
status including agreements or material issues with third the mineral leases
parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, covering
overriding royalties, native title interests, the Desert Scheelite
historical sites, wilderness or national park and prospect
environmental settings. located on the eastern
flank
of Pilot Mountain, 250 km
* The security of the tenure held at the time of southeast of the city of
reporting along with any known impediments to Reno and 20km east of the
obtaining a licence to operate in the area. town of Mina, in Nevada,
USA.
There are no known
impediments
to licence an operation
.
Exploration The deposit discovery date
done by other * Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other is not known. The deposit
parties parties. was held 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
has been collated in
accordance
with the guidelines of the
JORC (2012) code.
Geology Contact metamorphic skarn
* Deposit type, geological setting and style of hosted tungsten.
mineralisation.
Drill hole Details of the drilling
Information * A summary of all information material to the used
understanding of the exploration results including a to define the resources
tabulation of the following information for all are
Material drill holes: included in the resource
estimation 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 aggregation Exploration results are
methods * In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging not
techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations being reported.
(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 are
between mineralisation * These relationships are particularly important in the not
widths and reporting of Exploration Results. being reported.
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 are
* Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and not
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any being reported.
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 reporting Exploration results are
* Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration not
Results is not practicable, representative reporting being reported.
of both low and high grades and/or widths should be
practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
Other substantive Exploration results are
exploration * Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, not
data should be reported including (but not limited to): being reported.
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 work Exploration results are not
* The nature and scale of planned further work (eg 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.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Database A check of the database against
integrity * Measures taken to ensure that data has not been laboratory certificates was
corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying undertaken as part of the
errors, between its initial collection and its use database validation. The
for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. internal referential integrity
of the database was checked
as part of the resource
* Data validation procedures used. estimation.
Site visits In 2012, a Golder Associates
* Comment on any site visits undertaken by the geologist was delegated by
Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. the Competent Person to inspect
the Desert Scheelite site
as part of the resource estimation
* If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why process. A delegate was used
this is the case. 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 drill
hole database. The delegate
visited all Pilot Mountain
deposits.
Geological The geology of the deposit
interpretation * Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of ) was interpreted using logged
the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. lithology and sample analyses
to define zones of mineralised
skarn.
* Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. The geological interpretation
along strike and up dip is
confined by the drilling
* The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on and model extent.
Mineral Resource estimation.
* The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral
Resource estimation.
* The factors affecting continuity both of grade and
geology.
Dimensions Desert Scheelite strikes
* The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource 750 m east to west and spans
expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan 300 m north to south.
width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower
limits of the Mineral Resource.
Estimation The estimation was performed
and modelling * The nature and appropriateness of the estimation via conventional 3D estimation
techniques technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including with the orientation of the
treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, search ellipsoid in accordance
interpolation parameters and maximum distance of with the general orientation
extrapolation from data points. If a computer of the mineralised deposit
assisted estimation method was chosen include a within the channel.
description of computer software and parameters used. A four-pass kriging plan
was used with an octant-based
search. With the second through
* The availability of check estimates, previous to fourth passes using
estimates and/or mine production records and whether progressively
the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate larger search neighbourhoods
account of such data. to enable the estimation
of blocks remaining un-estimated
following the preceding passes.
* The assumptions made regarding recovery of Block discretisation was
by-products. set to 5 (X) by 5 (Y) by
2 (Z) to estimate block grades
of 30 m by 15 m by 3 m parent
* Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade blocks. Sub-cells of 6 m
variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for by 3 m by 1.5 m received
acid mine drainage characterisation). the parent cell estimate
when possible.
A minimum of 4 composites
* In the case of block model interpolation, the block and a maximum of 40 composites
size in relation to the average sample spacing and (Pass 1) overall, with a
the search employed. minimum of 2 octants applied
with a maximum of 5 samples
per octant with a limit of
* Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining 5 samples per drill hole.
units. Length-weighting was applied
to compensate for variations
in composite length for the
* Any assumptions about correlation between variables. data used in the estimation.
The estimation was performed
by mineralised domain code
* Description of how the geological interpretation was which separates individual
used to control the resource estimates. mineralised domains.
* Discussion of basis for using or not using grade
cutting or capping.
* The process of validation, the checking process used,
the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and
use of reconciliation data if available.
Moisture Tonnages are estimated on
* Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or a dry basis.
with natural moisture, and the method of
determination of the moisture content.
Cut-off parameters Modelling of the mineralised
* The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality zones used a nominal 1000
parameters applied. ppm WO3 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 factors No mining assumptions have
or assumptions * Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, been incorporated into the
minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if resource estimate. Historically
applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always Pilot Mountain deposits have
necessary as part of the process of determining been mined from shallow
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction underground
to consider potential mining methods, but the workings. The deposit contains
assumptions made regarding mining methods and near surface mineralisation
parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not and as such it could be
always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this anticipated
should be reported with an explanation of the basis that preliminary mining will
of the mining assumptions made. be by open pit methods.
Metallurgical No metallurgical factors
factors or * The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding or assumptions have been
assumptions metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as incorporated into the resource
part of the process of determining reasonable estimate.
prospects for eventual economic extraction to
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 or * Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process by the tenement holder have
assumptions residue disposal options. It is always necessary as not identified any environmental
part of the process of determining reasonable impacts from conceptual mining
prospects for eventual economic extraction to operations which would influence
consider the potential environmental impacts of the the cost base or the viability
mining and processing operation. While at this stage of mining of these resources.
the determination of potential environmental impacts,
particularly for a greenfields project, may not
always be well advanced, the status of early
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 density Dry bulk density values assigned
* Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis were based on 720 samples
for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, taken from during the recent
whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements drilling programs. Average
, values by geology were calculated.
the nature, size and representativeness of the
samples.
* The bulk density for bulk material must have been
measured by methods that adequately account for void
spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and
differences between rock and alteration zones within
the deposit.
* Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used
in the evaluation process of the different materials.
Classification Indicated and Inferred Resources
* The basis for the classification of the Mineral have been identified for
Resources into varying confidence categories. Desert Scheelite based principally
on the confidence in the
geological interpretation
* Whether appropriate account has been taken of all and the density of data.
relevant factors (ie relative confidence in
tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data,
confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,
quality, quantity and distribution of the data).
* Whether the result appropriately reflects the
Competent Person's view of the deposit.
Audits or At this stage of the project
reviews * The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral no external audits have been
Resource estimates. undertaken.
Discussion The Competent Person considers
of relative * Where appropriate a statement of the relative the resource to be a robust
accuracy/ accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource global estimate of the data
confidence estimate using an approach or procedure deemed available.
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the The integrity of the historical
application of statistical or geostatistical raw data cannot be guaranteed
procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the other than to state that
resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such the data is consistent with
an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative the recent drilling and the
discussion of the factors that could affect the geology is consistent with
relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. the type and style of
mineralisation.
There is no production data
* The statement should specify whether it relates to against which to compare
global or local estimates, and, if local, state the the estimate.
relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to
technical and economic evaluation. Documentation
should include assumptions made and the procedures
used.
* These statements of relative accuracy and confidence
of the estimate should be compared with production
data, where available.
------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.
END
UPDVXLBFVLFBFBK
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 13, 2018 03:20 ET (08:20 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
