AI assistant
LUNNON METALS LIMITED — Capital/Financing Update 2021
Oct 18, 2021
65246_rns_2021-10-18_c78e14bb-67b8-419f-8d87-280330ae1f25.pdf
Capital/Financing Update
Open in viewerOpens in your device viewer
==> picture [139 x 840] intentionally omitted <==
----- Start of picture text -----
LUNNON METALS LIMITED
ABN: 82 600 008 848
BOARD/MANAGEMENT
Mr Liam Twigger
NON-EXECUTIVE CHAIRPERSON
Mr Ian Junk
NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Mr Ashley McDonald
NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Mr Edmund Ainscough
MANAGING DIRECTOR
Mr Aaron Wehrle
EXPLORATION &
GEOLOGY MANAGER
OFFICE
Suite 5/11 Ventnor Avenue
WEST PERTH WA 6005
POSTAL ADDRESS
PO BOX 470
WEST PERTH WA 6872
CONTACT DETAILS
+61 8 9226 0887
[email protected]
lunnonmetals.com.au
SHARE REGISTRY
Automic Group
ASX CODE: LM8
----- End of picture text -----
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
MORE NICKEL AT EAST COOEE HANGING-WALL
19th October 2021
HIGHLIGHTS
-
Hanging-wall surfaces return further high grade nickel
-
Significant results include 1.0m @ 3.15% Ni and 2.0m @ 2.44% Ni
-
DHTEM results indicate key high grade trend
-
Mineralised nickel sulphide system emerging adjacent to existing infrastructure
Lunnon Metals Limited ( ASX: LM8 ) (the “ Company ” or “ Lunnon Metals ”) is pleased to report the remaining results from the Company’s East Cooee Hanging-wall (“ H/W ”) prospect at the Kambalda Nickel Project (“ KNP ”). Please refer to Figure 1 for the location of the East Cooee H/W prospect at KNP and the ASX announcement dated 1[st] October 2021 for previous results.
EAST COOEE H/W
Results from the three remaining RC holes from this initial programme have now been received with the hanging-wall surfaces once more recording significant results in two holes as follows:
ECO21RC_009
-
4.0 metres (3.9 mTW) @ 0.89% Ni from 125 metres including:
-
1.0 metre @ 1.39% Ni from 126 metres; and
-
1.0 metre (1.0 mTW) @ 3.15% from 138 metres.
ECO21RC_010
- 2.0 metres (1.9 mTW) @ 2.44% Ni from 174 metres.
Down Hole Transient Electro-Magnetic survey (“DHTEM”) results were also received for the programme. Anomalous conductors were recorded in surveys of each of the four holes ECO21RC_007 through 010 supporting the high grade assays received. The survey results also indicate the orientation of a higher grade trend aligned with nickel intercepts of greater than 5.0%m Ni (i.e. grade x intercept width); this trend is now recorded over an area at least 400m by 80m when historical WMC drilling is included.
Commenting on these results Managing Director, Ed Ainscough said:
"The East Cooee H/W prospect is shaping up as a potential significant contributor to our growth plans. These results confirm a higher grade trend is present and supported by the DHTEM survey results. Planning of both infill RC drilling on the higher grade trend followed by diamond holes for metallurgical purposes is underway. Importantly, this area is right next door to the East Cooee Trough and close to an existing open pit for a possible future access point, both strong reasons to advance this prospect as quickly as possible."
P a g e | 1
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
==> picture [502 x 280] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 1: Plan view of the KNP illustrating the project boundary, simplified footprint of komatiite rocks at surface and location of the East Cooee H/W and East Trough relative to the existing JORC 2012 Mineral Resources projected to surface.
OPPORTUNITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 2 below represents a plan view of the recent Lunnon Metals drilling together with the historical WMC drilling. The location of this emerging higher grade trend is illustrated relative to the nearby West Idough Open Pit (mined for gold by Gold Fields Ltd).
As a high ranking target selected for first assessment by RC drilling post the Company’s recent Initial Public Offering (“IPO”), the East Cooee area has confirmed its priority status with the following results:
-
High grade nickel sulphide : confirmation of historical WMC nickel sulphide drill intercepts, validating target selection by Lunnon Metals;
-
Shallow : approximately 100 - 150m below surface to first hanging-wall nickel mineralised surface;
-
Close to infrastructure : approximately 350 – 400m from historical, 35 – 65m deep, gold open pit offering nearby future bedrock access point; and
-
Multiple mineralised surfaces : RC drilling has recorded at least two hanging-wall surfaces on the East Cooee-H/W prospect which itself is only approximately 300 – 400m from the Company’s first high grade sulphide intercept of 2.0m @ 5.07% Ni on the East Trough prospect[1] .
1 Refer to ASX announcement dated 28th September 2021 “East Trough returns 2.0m @ 5.07% Ni”
P a g e | 2
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
==> picture [497 x 382] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 2: Plan view of Lunnon Metals and historical WMC drilling at East Cooee-H/W coloured by %mNi values: see Annexure 1.b. for numbering identifying WMC drilling (^for details of previously announced results, see ASX announcements dated 28 September and 1 October 2021)
DOWN HOLE TRANSIENT ELECTRO-MAGNETIC SURVEYS (“DHTEM”)
All 6 RC holes completed (ECO21RC_006 through 011) were surveyed by the DHTEM method. The survey results indicate that the high grade intercepts recorded in Lunnon Metals’ recent drilling are generally supported by zones of high conductive response. The conductive plates modelled are illustrated in plan view in Figure 3 below (green) projected over the mineralised nickel shoots in red.
The exact orientation and dimension of each of the conductive plates modelled is being reviewed against the interpreted geology. The geophysical consultants recommend that individual tailored surface loops may be required to better survey and model the East Trough and East Cooee-H/W targets separately. The results received to date were generated from a single surface loop designed to cover both target areas.
The overall high grade trend of the modelled plates, trending 290[o] , parallels both the orientation of the adjacent East Trough (approximately 300m to the west) and also the overall trend of the main Foster Mine channel, on the western limb of the Cooee Anticline. As such, it is interpreted that the trend reflects the direction of the komatiite flow, the interpreted source of the prospective higher grade nickel zones.
P a g e | 3
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
==> picture [496 x 327] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 3: Plan View of East Cooee – H/W – showing DHTEM plates (green), drill holes - magenta (main lower surface)/ orange (upper) with footwall basalt wireframe (yellow mesh) and mineralised surfaces (red).
ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION
Along with the results reported on 28[th] September 2021 for the adjacent East Trough prospect and 1[st] October 2021 for the first three RC holes at the East Cooee H/W, these programmes have confirmed multiple nickel sulphide mineralised positions which are both adjacent to each other and relatively shallow. These nickel mineralised surfaces sit outside the Company’s current Mineral Resource and offer an important second centre of potential resource growth in addition to the Foster Mine.
As previously reported these H/W mineralised surfaces:
-
Sit approximately between 30m and 60m above the komatiite-basalt contact;
-
Typically comprise stringer to disseminated nickel sulphides but can include zones of massive nickel sulphides; and
-
Now have drill intersection points on a pattern allowing consideration to be given to estimating an initial Mineral Resource.
These latest RC hole results and the programme of DHTEM surveys indicate the following:
-
High grade components were again present within lower grade nickel mineralised envelopes;
-
The trend of the modelled DHTEM plates reflecting the high grade extends over a minimum distance of 160m (plunge) by 50m (wide);
P a g e | 4
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
-
ECO21RC_010 recorded 2.0m @ 2.44% Ni approximately 24.0m below an interval of 2.0m @ 0.66% Ni. The higher grade zone was deeper than interpreted but was supported by the conductive plate modelled in the DHTEM survey for this hole and may link with the higher grade zone previously reported in ECO21RC_007 (1.0m @ 7.44% Ni);
-
ECO21RC_006 (previously reported 1.0m @ 0.64% Ni and 1.0m @ 0.81% Ni) and ECO21RC_011 (no significant assays) intersected the targeted surface approximately 50m to the west of the high grade trend and thus appear to constrain it in this direction.
Figures 4 and 5 below illustrate cross sectional views of the drill programme.
==> picture [495 x 336] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 4: Section 6,531,200mN through East Cooee – H/W – drill holes
P a g e | 5
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
==> picture [497 x 338] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 5: Section 6,531,160mN through East Cooee – H/W – drill holes
EXPLORATION TARGET
The East Cooee area is hosted on the eastern limb of the folded prospective nickel belt at KNP and is rapidly being defined as a mineralised nickel system with the potential to complement the Company’s existing Mineral Resource of 39,000 tonnes of nickel at the Foster Mine (located 2.5km to the west).
The East Cooee H/W prospect formed part of the East Cooee Exploration Target[2] reported in the Company’s Prospectus. The combined tonnage and grade potential of the Exploration Target was estimated to be in the range of 500kt to 750kt with an average grade of 1.25% to 2.5% nickel. The East Cooee H/W surfaces formed the basis of the lower limits of this estimate. Lunnon Metals highlights that the potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature, that prior to this programme of first phase RC drilling of 6 holes, there had been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it was uncertain if further exploration would result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.
This programme of RC drilling was therefore a key part of the Company’s proposed exploration activities designed to test the validity of the Exploration Target as required under the JORC Code, 2012 Edition.
2 Please refer to the Competent Person’s Statement & Compliance section appended to this announcement for full details of the basis of the Exploration Target.
P a g e | 6
==> picture [204 x 75] intentionally omitted <==
NEXT STEPS
Defining the orientation of these higher grade zones, indicated by both the assay results and the DHTEM surveys, is now a priority. The opportunity to also extend these zones in the down-plunge direction where the previous drilling does not constrain them, is also present.
Infill RC drilling targeting the conductive plates modelled from the DHTEM surveys will now be planned which, if successful, will be at a spacing to support a maiden Mineral Resource estimate for East Cooee-H/W prospect.
Diamond drilling is also planned, once the RC infill is complete, to both target the high grade trend, provide representative samples for metallurgical testing and also structural information to assist in modelling the high grade zones.
UPDATE ON OTHER EAST COOEE TARGETS
EAST TROUGH DHTEM
As recently reported, DHTEM surveying of ECO21RC_005 failed to reach target depth (289m down hole) for the reported 2.0m @ 5.07% Ni due to an obstruction in the PVC casing. Inspections have since determined that the PVC casing cannot be removed and the Company has been advised not to attempt to drill through the casing that remains. Consequently, the Company has completed a diamond hole designed to provide a reliable DHTEM platform to survey for proximal nickel mineralisation. The hole was drilled an additional 50m into the footwall of the komatiite-basalt contact (i.e. a target end of hole depth of approximately 360m) to ensure the best possible position for the subsequent DHTEM survey.
WEST TROUGH
Two exploratory RC holes were drilled into shallower areas of the conceptual West Trough up-plunge position, aiming to test both for the presence of nickel mineralisation and allow for DHTEM survey of the surrounding area. Neither ECO21RC_004 or ECO21RC_012 recorded any significant nickel assays and whilst the deeper of the two holes into the target recorded subtle off-hole responses in its DHTEM survey, they are not considered significant.
Additional targeting exercises are required to further explore the West Trough concept however in the interim, whilst the West Trough remains prospective at depth, the adjacent East Trough and East Cooee-H/W prospects will remain the priority in this area.
This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Lunnon Metals Ltd.
Edmund Ainscough Managing Director Phone: +61 8 9226 0887 Email: [email protected]
P a g e | 7
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
Annexure 1a: 2021 East Cooee – Drill Hole Collar Table – Lunnon Metals Drilling
| Hole ID | Easting^ | Northing^ | Elevation (m ASL) |
Dip | Azimuth | EOH Drill Depth (m) |
Hole Type |
Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| East Cooee – H/W Surfaces | ||||||||
| ECO21RC_004 | 385,306 | 6,530,700 | 325.1 | 75.3 | 304.2 | 220 | RC | MGA94_51 |
| ECO21RC_009 | 385,685 | 6,531,200 | 322.2 | 70.2 | 273.7 | 240 | RC | MGA94_51 |
| ECO21RC_010 | 385,624 | 6,531,161 | 322.8 | 70.7 | 274.9 | 215 | RC | MGA94_51 |
| ECO21RC_011 | 385,518 | 6,531,155 | 320.0 | 70.6 | 271.6 | 190 | RC | MGA94_51 |
| ECO21RC_012 | 385,182 | 6,530,800 | 322.5 | 67.6 | 299.3 | 100 | RC | MGA94_51 |
^For current drilling, as pegged coordinates, final survey pick up of collar positions to occur on a campaign basis in the near future.
Annexure 1b: East Cooee Area– Drill Hole Collar Table – historical WMC drilling
| Hole ID (label on Fig. 2) |
Easting | Northing | Elevation (m ASL) |
Dip | Azimuth | EOH Drill Depth (m) |
Hole Type |
Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD186(3) | 385,580.2 | 6,531,221.0 | 319.1 | 90 | 0 | 100.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD199(1) | 385,426.4 | 6,531,253.5 | 316.9 | 90 | 0 | 110.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD210(5) | 385,428.0 | 6,531,154.0 | 318.6 | 90 | 0 | 168.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD211(6) | 385,526.4 | 6,531,155.5 | 318.6 | 90 | 0 | 279.72 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD212(7) | 385,627.3 | 6,531,156.0 | 321.5 | 90 | 0 | 621.22 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD222(8) | 385,727.6 | 6,531,156.5 | 320.5 | 90 | 0 | 350.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD225(2) | 385,626.3 | 6,531,255.5 | 319.7 | 90 | 0 | 587.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD234 (4) | 385,328.0 | 6,531,154.0 | 317.8 | 90 | 0 | 350.75 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD337(18) | 385,927.7 | 6,530,854.0 | 322.0 | 90 | 0 | 940.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD337W1(19) | Wedge hole of CD337 | 627.00 | D | MGA94_51 | ||||
| CD337W2(17) | Wedge hole of CD337 | 487.00 | D | MGA94_51 | ||||
| SID283(9) | 385,827.2 | 6,531,157.5 | 319.4 | 90 | 0 | 708.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| SID307(12) | 385,727.7 | 6,531,056.0 | 320.8 | 90 | 0 | 385.70 | D | MGA94_51 |
| SID308(16) | 385,728.4 | 6,530,957.0 | 321.6 | 90 | 0 | 416.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| SID319(13) | 385,826.3 | 6,531,057.0 | 319.9 | 90 | 0 | 604.08 | D | MGA94_51 |
| SID347(11) | 385,628.0 | 6531,054.5 | 321.5 | 90 | 0 | 360.78 | D | MGA94_51 |
| SID430a(14) | 385,929.9 | 6,531,057.0 | 321.9 | 90 | 0 | 498.20 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD572(15) | 385,658.4 | 6,530,956.0 | 324.1 | 71 | 315 | 297.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
| CD574(10) | 385,690.8 | 6,530,986.5 | 323.9 | 60 | 315 | 295.00 | D | MGA94_51 |
P a g e | 8
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
Annexure 2a: 2021 East Cooee – Lunnon Metals Drill Results
| Hole ID | From (drill depth) (m) |
Width (m) |
Approx. True Width (m) |
Ni % | Cu % | Co % | Fe % | Mg % | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECO21RC_004 | no significant assays | West Trough |
|||||||
| ECO21RC_009 | 115 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 0.71 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 7.9 | 17.8 | H/W |
| ECO21RC_009 | 125 | 4.0 | 3.9 | 0.89 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 8.1 | 19.2 | H/W |
| including | |||||||||
| ECO21RC_009 | 126 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.39 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 9.8 | 18.3 | **H/W ** |
| ECO21RC_009 | 137 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 1.97 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 14.0 | 13.6 | H/W |
| including | |||||||||
| ECO21RC_009 | 138 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 3.15 | 0.33 | 0.04 | 18.7 | 10.7 | **H/W ** |
| ECO21RC_010 | 150 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 0.66 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 8.9 | 16.1 | H/W |
| ECO21RC_010 | 174 | 2.0 | 1.9 | 2.44* | 0.25 | 0.05 | 14.4 | 12.1 | **H/W ** |
| ECO21RC_011 | no significant assays | H/W | |||||||
| ECO21RC_012 | no significant assays | West Trough |
*the reported interval recorded 2 m @ 3.31% Ni when the field duplicate assay for one of the 1 m intervals was included.
Annexure 2b: East Cooee – historical WMC Drill Results
| Hole ID | From (drill depth- m) |
Width (m) |
Approx. True Width(m) |
Ni % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Surface | – existing interpretation | |||
| CD199 | 62.00 | 2.00 | 1.70 | 0.93 |
| CD210 | no significant assays | |||
| CD211 | 125.00 | 6.70 | 6.20 | 0.78 |
| including | ||||
| CD211 | 126.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 2.02 |
| CD212 | 155.70 | 6.20 | 5.60 | 1.07 |
| including | ||||
| CD212 | 156.98 | 1.56 | 1.41 | 1.55 |
| CD222 | 195.50 | 1.32 | 1.15 | 1.02 |
| CD234 | no significant assays | |||
| CD337 | 440.95 | 3.14 | 1.60 | 1.07 |
| CD337 W1 | 506.40 | 3.60 | 1.55 | 0.88 |
| CD337 W2 | no significant assays | |||
| SID283 | 265.66 | 1.64 | 1.40 | 0.84 |
| SID283 | 269.93 | 0.59 | 0.50 | 7.64 |
| SID308 | 270.90 | 6.05 | 5.50 | 0.67 |
| SID319 | 305.48 | 3.32 | 2.85 | 2.04 |
| including | ||||
| SID319 | 305.48 | 2.24 | 1.92 | 2.38 |
| SID347 | no significant assays | |||
| SID430a | no significant assays | |||
| CD572 | no significant assays |
P a g e | 9
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Hole ID | From (drill depth- m) |
Width (m) |
Approx. True Width(m) |
Ni % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD574 | no significant assays | |||
| Upper Surface– existing interpretation | ||||
| CD186 | 98.00 | 2.00 | 1.80 | 0.65 |
| CD222 | 162.26 | 1.41 | 1.30 | 2.19 |
| CD225 | 102.80 | 1.97 | 1.90 | 0.94 |
| SID307 | 210.43 | 3.27 | 2.97 | 2.04 |
| including | ||||
| SID307 | 212.38 | 1.32 | 1.20 | 2.60 |
| Komatiite-Basalt(basal) Contact(noted on Figure 3) | ||||
| CD225 | 183.38 | 0.77 | 0.70 | 0.64 |
| SID307 | 280.60 | 0.47 | 0.45 | 1.71 |
P a g e | 10
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
==> picture [272 x 348] intentionally omitted <==
Figure 6: Regional Location of the Kambalda Nickel Project and other nearby nickel deposits
ABOUT THE KAMBALDA NICKEL PROJECT (“KNP”)
Lunnon Metals holds 100% of the mineral rights at KNP, subject to certain rights retained by St Ives*. Full details of the Company’s IPO and the transactions involved are in the Prospectus submitted to the ASX dated 22 April 2021 and lodged with the ASX on 11 June 2021.
KNP, shown in its regional location in Figure 6, is approximately 23 km[2] in size comprising 19 contiguous granted mining leases situated within the Kambalda Nickel District which extends for more than 70 kilometres south from the township of Kambalda (“Tenements”).
This world-renowned nickel district has produced in excess of 1.4 million tonnes of nickel metal since its discovery in 1966 by WMC Resources Ltd (“WMC”). In addition, close to 15 Moz of gold in total has been mined with WMC accounting for 5.9 Moz and over 8.3 Moz produced by Gold Fields Ltd since the purchase of the operation in December 2001 from WMC, making the Kambalda/St Ives district a globally significant gold camp in its own right.
*St Ives retains rights to explore for and mine gold in the “Excluded Areas” on the Tenements as defined in the subsisting agreements between Lunnon Metals and St Ives. This right extends to gold mineralisation which extends from the Excluded Area to other parts of the Tenements with select restrictions which serve to prevent interference with, or intrusion on, Lunnon Metals’ existing or planned activities and those parts of the Tenements containing the historical nickel mines. St Ives enjoys select rights to gold in the remaining areas of the Tenements in certain limited circumstances as described in detail in the Company’s Solicitor Report attached to the Prospectus submitted to the ASX dated 22 April 2021 and lodged with the ASX on 11 June 2021.
P a g e | 11
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
COMPETENT PERSON’S STATEMENT & COMPLIANCE
The information in this announcement that relates to geology, nickel Mineral Resources, the East Cooee Exploration Target and Exploration Results, is based on, and fairly represents, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr. Aaron Wehrle, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM). Mr. Wehrle is a full time employee of Lunnon Metals Ltd, a shareholder and holder of employee options; he has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity that he is undertaking to qualify as Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr. Wehrle consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.
MINERAL RESOURCES
The detailed breakdown of the Company’s Mineral Resources is as follows:
==> picture [495 x 170] intentionally omitted <==
EXPLORATION TARGET
An Exploration Target for East Cooee was estimated by the Company in 2020 in accordance with the guidelines of the JORC Code, (2012). This work identified multiple mineralised surfaces in komatiite-basalt contact trough locations, contact flanking locations, footwall positions and extensive hanging wall surfaces.
The combined tonnage and grade potential of the Exploration Target was estimated to be in the range of 500 to 750 kt with an average grade of 1.25% to 2.5% nickel. The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature. In the Company’s Prospectus, Optiro, in its Independent Technical Assessment Report in Schedule 3, noted that there has been insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it was uncertain if further exploration will result in the estimation of a Mineral Resource. Lunnon Metals confirms that this assessment is still valid pending the outcome of the planned drilling campaigns reported.
The Exploration Target is based on supporting geological information and drillhole data from WMC and geological interpretations by Lunnon Metals. Included in the data on which this Exploration Target has been prepared are the results from surface diamond drillholes across the East Cooee area, completed by WMC during the 1970s and 1980s.
The Exploration Target does not account for potential geological complexity, possible mining method or metallurgical recovery factors. The Exploration Target was estimated in order to provide an assessment of the potential scale and grade of the mineralisation intersected in drilling and supported by strong and high magnitude nickel-in-soils geochemical anomalism.
P a g e | 12
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
The Exploration Target was defined by using a combination of two methodologies. The first used the historical surface drilling to generate 3D models (within the Leapfrog software) of the basalt-ultramafic contact across the East Cooee area. Drillhole intercepts with lower cut-off grades of between 0.5% and 1.0% nickel were identified and tagged in the 3D modelling environment as representing either hanging-wall, contact (both trough style and flanking style), or footwall mineralised domains. Solid 3D wireframes were created from these tagged drill intercepts. The wireframes were modelled to an extent that they 1) conform to the geometry of the modelled basalt-ultramafic contact; 2) are supported by adjacent drill intercepts; and 3) have dimensions no greater than what is supported by observed occurrences of those styles of mineralisation in the Foster mine environment. The Leapfrog implicit radial basis function interpolant process was used to estimate the nickel grades within the various East Cooee domains and populate block models to obtain volumes and grade above a 1.0% nickel cut-off grade. Tonnes were calculated by multiplying the volumes by a fixed density of 3.0 t/m[3] .
The second methodology involved Cube in December 2020, whereby they estimated an Exploration Target for the two main East Cooee hanging-wall nickel lodes in the East Cooee area. Drillhole data and geological interpretations were supplied by Lunnon Metals and Cube produced the estimate using standard processes and procedures including data selection, compositing, variography, estimation by OK and model validation. Estimates were made for nickel and bulk density only. Although the estimation work completed by Cube is to a standard consistent with the JORC(2012) guidelines for the reporting of Mineral Resource, the resulting classification as Exploration Target was determined by the Company based on insufficient Reasonable Prospects for Eventual Economic Extraction (RPEEE) due to broad spaced drilling and relatively low estimated nickel grades.
Based on these two estimation methodologies a range of tonnes and grade was derived for the Exploration Target of the combined East Cooee mineralised domains. In the Company’s Prospectus, Optiro, in its Independent Technical Assessment Report in Schedule 3, stated that it had reviewed the Exploration Target and considered it had been appropriately estimated and was representative of the exploration potential at East Cooee.
DISCLAIMER
References in this announcement may have been made to certain previous ASX announcements, which in turn may have included exploration results and Mineral Resources. For full details, please refer to the said announcement on the said date. The Company is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects this information. Other than as specified in this announcement and mentioned announcements, the Company confirms it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement(s), and in the case of estimates of Mineral Resources that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original announcement.
P a g e | 13
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
JORC CODE 2012: TABLE 1
SECTION 1 SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sampling techniques |
Nature and quality of sampling (e.g., 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. |
• All drilling and sampling were undertaken in an industry standard manner. • Reverse Circulation (RC) and Diamond Drill holes (DDH) at the Kambalda Nickel Project (KNP) were completed by Blue Spec Drilling Pty Ltd (Blue Spec) on behalf of Lunnon Metals following protocols and QAQC procedures aligned with industry best practice. RC • RC samples were collected on a 1.0m basis from a cone splitter mounted on the drill rig cyclone. 1.0m sample mass typically averages 3.0kg. • Industry prepared independent standards and blanks are each inserted, approximately every 50 samples. • Duplicate samples were also collected from the drill rig cyclone , at a rate of 1 in every 25 samples. • The independent laboratory then takes the samples which are dried, crushed and pulverized prior to analysis as described below. • For sample weights > 3kg the sample is dried, split and pulverised up to 3kg (with the reject discarded). • Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the material sampled. • The samples are considered representative and appropriate for this type of drilling. • RC samples are appropriate for use in a resource estimate. WMC Historical data • Sampling procedures followed by Western Mining Corporation Ltd (WMC) in the drilling, retrieval, and storage of diamond drill core both surface and underground are considered to be in line with industry standards at the time (1966 to 2001). • The drill core was typically collected in steel core trays of 1.0m lengths comprising five to seven compartments depending on drill core diameter. The core trays were numbered with the downhole meterage for the start of the first 1 m run and the end of the last 1 m run on the lip of the core tray and typically included core blocks within the core trays demarcating the depth meterage of rod pull breaks. • The drillhole number and the ‘from’ and ‘to’ depth of the contained drill core was labelled on the front of the core tray. The earlier drilling was collected in wooden, and hybrid wooden/steel core trays and occasionallydepths recorded in feet. |
|
| 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 (e.g. ‘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 (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. |
|||
| Drilling techniques |
Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. 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.). |
• RC holes were drilled with a 5 1/2-inch bit and face sampling hammer. • Although no documentation is available to describe the drilling techniques used by WMC at the time it is understood that the various drilling types used conventional drilling methods consistent with industry standards. None of the diamond drill core was oriented. |
|
| Drill sample recovery |
Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed. |
• RC samples are routinely checked for recovery, moisture, and contamination. • No sample bias is observed. |
P a g e | 14
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. |
• There is no relationship between recovery and grade nor bias related to fine or coarse sample material. • There are no available records for sample recovery for diamond drilling completed by WMC; however, re-logging exercises completed by Lunnon Metals of both underground and surface diamond drillholes from across the KNP between 2017 and 2021 found that on average drill recovery was very good and acceptable by industry standards. |
|
| 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. |
RC • Geology logging is undertaken for the entire hole recording lithology, oxidation state, mineralisation, alteration, and veining. • Geological logging (and where required, geotechnical logging) is completed in sufficient detail to support future Mineral Resource estimation, mining and metallurgical studies to be undertaken with confidence. • Additional metallurgical testwork will be completed if warranted in the future in addition to the geological logging and element assaying detailed below. • General logging data captured are qualitative (descriptions of the various geological features and units) and quantitative (numbers representing structural attitudes, vein and sulphide percentages, magnetic susceptibility and conductivity). WMC Historical data • There is no available documentation describing the logging procedures employed by WMC geologists at the Foster nickel mine or in the KNP area generally; however, the historical graphical hardcopy logs and other geoscientific records available for the project are of high quality and contain significant detail with logging intervals down to as narrow as 0.01 m. The geological logs document lithology, textures, structures, alteration, and mineralisation observed in drill core captured both graphically and in a five-character logging code (Lunnon Metals notes that a previous logging legend employed at WMC’s Kambalda nickel operations utilised a 3 letter code which is often represented on hard copy plan and cross sections of an older vintage and which was converted by WMC to the latter 5 character code at some later time). Stratigraphy is also captured in a three-character logging code. Sample intervals are recorded on the graphical log. These logging legends are well documented in lieu of a recorded procedure. • In regard geotechnical logging or procedures, there is no record of any formal relevant procedures or logging and based on personal experience of the Competent Person, such logging was not routinely completed prior to the introduction of Regulation 10:28 in the WA Mine Safety and Inspection Act, requiring the same in approximately 1996. • Based on the personal experience of the Competent Person(s) to this announcement, having worked for WMC in Kambalda between 1987 and 2001, it is known that WMC had a rigorous and regimented system for storing and archiving the graphical logs physically, microfilmed, and drafted on to master cross sections, plans, and long sections as well as capturing the interval data (logging and assays) digitally in database format. • Lunnon Metals sourced historical diamond core from the St Ives Kambalda coreyard on Durkin Road where relevant to its |
| Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography. |
||
| The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. |
P a g e | 15
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| investigations. A selection of high priority drillholes was typically identified based on proximity to the proposed area of interest. Thereafter a representative number of holes were re-logged to validate lithological and structural information whilst a lessor number of holes were logged for geotechnical data such as rock RQD,fracture count assessment and core recovery. |
||
| Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation |
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. |
RC • RC sampling was carried out every 1.0m by a cone splitter on a rig cyclone. • 1.0m calico samples taken directly from the cyclone were submitted for analysis. • Field QAQC procedures involve the use of certified reference material (CRM) inserted approximately 1 in 50 samples. • A field duplicate, namely a second identical cone split at the cyclone, is collected every 25 samples. • At the assay laboratory, each sample was dried, split (if sample weight was >3kg), crushed, and pulverised. • Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation (potentially nickeliferous massive, matrix and disseminated sulphides, hosted in komatiite and basalt; and altered quartz veins/shear structures considered potentially auriferous in all lithological types). WMC Historical data • All historical core that was relevant to the mineralisation drilled and sampled by WMC as sighted by Lunnon Metals was sawn with half or quarter core sampling practices. It is assumed that all samples reported or otherwise contributing to any estimation of nickel mineralisation by Lunnon Metals were processed with this standard methodology. • Portions of drill core distal to the main high-grade mineralisation were sometimes ‘chip sampled’ by WMC. Lunnon Metals has chosen not to utilise such samples in any estimation of grade or mineralisation. • WMC typically sampled in interval lengths relevant to the underlying lithology and mineralisation such that sample interval lengths may vary from between minima of 0.05 m and maxima up to 2.00 m within any mineralised zone, shoot or nickel surface of interest. Intervals of no mineralisation or interest were not sampled. Review of historical drill core during re-logging and re-sampling exercises by Lunnon Metals indicated that there were no areas of interest relevant to nickel mineralisation that were not half or quarter core sawn and sampled by WMC and that the sample sizes were appropriate for the type, style and thickness of mineralisation being tested with sample breaks corresponding to lithological or mineralisation breaks being the norm. Although faded through time, sample depth intervals are evident as marked on the remaining half core as observed by Lunnon Metals and these correlate to sample interval depths in the original paper graphical drill logs and the database. • While the WMC procedure for logging, sampling, assaying and QAQC of drillhole programs was not available at the time of this announcement it is interpreted that it was of high quality and in line with industry standards at that time. • It is the opinion of the Competent Person(s) that the sample preparation,security,and analyticalprocedurespertainingto the |
| 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. |
P a g e | 16
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | |
|---|---|---|---|
| above-mentioned historical WMC drilling are adequate and fit for purpose based on: - WMC's reputation of excellence in geoscience stemming from their discovery of nickel sulphides in Kambalda in the late 1960s; - identification of procedures entitled “WMC QAQC Practices for Sampling and Analysis, Version 2 - adapted for St Ives Gold” dated February 2001 and which includes practices for nickel; and - the first-hand knowledge and experience of the Competent Person(s) of this announcement whilst working for WMC at Kambalda between 1987 and 2001. |
|||
| 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. |
• Samples were submitted to Intertek Genalysis in Kalgoorlie for sample preparation i.e. drying and pulverising. • Pulverised samples were then transported to Intertek Genalysis in Perth for analysis. • Samples were analysed for a multi-element suite including Ni, Cu, Co, Ag, Cu, As, Co, Fe, Mn, Pb, S, Zn. Analytical techniques used a four-acid digest (with ICPMS finish) of hydrofluoric, nitric, perchloric and hydrochloric acids, suitable for near total dissolution of almost all minerals species including silica-based samples. • Where considered necessary, Au was analysed using 50g lead collection fire assay and analysed by ICPOES. • These techniques are considered quantitative in nature. • As discussed previously, CRM is inserted by the Company and the laboratory also carries out internal standards in individual batches. • The resultant Lunnon Metals and laboratory QAQC data is reviewed upon receipt to determine that the accuracy and precision of the data has been identified as acceptable. WMC Historical data • There is no data available at the time of this announcement pertaining to the assaying and laboratory procedures nor the historical field or laboratory quality assurance and quality control (QAQC), if any, undertaken by WMC drilling programs at the Foster nickel mine or in the KNP area generally; however, it is expected that industry standards as a minimum were likely to have been adopted at the Foster mine, KNP area and the analytical laboratory, considering WMC’s reputation for excellence in geosciences. • The extensive Lunnon Metals re-sampling programme of historical ½ or ¼ core drill core applied the methodology and practices as recorded above for current RC & DDH. |
|
| 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 (e.g. standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been established. |
|||
| Verification of sampling and assaying |
The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. |
• Significant intersections have not been independently verified and no twinned holes have been completed. • Logging and sample intervals are uploaded by Company geologists once logging is completed into internal cloud hosted datasheets and then to a database managed by Maxwell Geoservices Pty Ltd (maxgeo). • Assays from the laboratory are checked and verified by maxgeo database administrator before uploading. • No adjustments have been made to assay data. • Any assays results for a composited interval within a drillhole are reported on a length weighted basis. |
|
| 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. |
P a g e | 17
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | |
|---|---|---|---|
| WMC Historical data • Diamond core data - Lunnon Metals has undertaken exhaustive analysis of historical WMC underground and surface diamond drilling to inspect and visually validate significant drill assays and intercepts that inform any interpretation of nickel mineralisation including any MRE work. • Firstly, confirmation is made of the sample ID and visual presentation of the core (to match logged lithology). Then the re- sampling exercise of remaining ½ or ¼ core drill core represents an independent duplicate style of data verification of the original nickel assay results obtained by WMC as stored in the database. The analysis of the duplicate samples is undertaken through Intertek’s laboratory in Perth using four-acid digest with ICP-OES or ICP-MS finish with appropriate company and laboratory analytical QAQC procedures. • No significant anomalies have been identified and the Competent Person is satisfied that the original data is representative of the geology and mineralisation modelled; thus no adjustments to assay data have been deemed necessary or made. • No twin holes have been completed to date. No non company personnel (other than in the assay laboratory processes) or alternative company personnel have been involved in the exercise due to the small size of the company and the robustness of the procedures detailed herein. • Lunnon Metals notes that the Kambalda style of nickel mineralisation is highly visible permitting the nickel grade to be relatively accurately estimated by experienced geologists; this is a practise that is not uncommon in the nickel miningindustry. |
|||
| Location of data points |
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drillholes (collar and down- hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. |
• RC hole collar locations are located by handheld GPS to an accuracy of +/- 3m. • All drill holes were surveyed downhole at 5m intervals using the REFLEX gyro spirit-IQ system (north seeking gyro) for both azimuth and dip measurements. • Downhole surveys are uploaded to the IMDEXHUB-IQ, a cloud- based data management program where surveys are validated and approved by the geologist before importing into the database. • The grid projection is GDA94/ MGA Zone 51. • Diagrams and location data tables are provided in the report where relevant. WMC Historical data • Historical methods of drill collar survey pick-up are not known. The easting, northing and elevation values were originally recorded in local KNO (‘Kambalda Nickel Operations’) grid and later converted to the currently used GDA94/MGA Zone 51 grid. Both the original KNO grid coordinates and the converted coordinates are recorded in the database. A representative number of historical drill collars were located in the field and their locations cross checked via differential GPS and/or handheld GPS to validate the database collar coordinates. • Historical hardcopy downhole survey data is generally available for all surface drillholes and the records show that single shot magnetic instruments were used. A representative number of these hardcopy downhole survey records have been cross checked against the digital records in the database. |
|
| Specification of the grid system used. | |||
| Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
P a g e | 18
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | |
|---|---|---|---|
| • No new downhole surveys have been conducted however Lunnon Metals has corrected where necessary incorrect data in the database where down hole measurements from the hardcopy data were incorrectly processed. • No other significant errors or inconsistencies were deemed present or capable of being detrimental to any interpretation of nickel mineralisation includinganyMRE work. |
|||
| Data spacing and distribution |
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. |
• The RC and DDH programme at KNP comprises drillhole spacings that are dependent on the target style, orientation and depth. Drillholes are not drilled to set patterns or spacing at the exploration stage of the programme. • If follow up drilling is warranted with the objective of progressing the prospect towards a data density sufficient to support a future Mineral Resource estimation, spacing may vary from 40m x 40m to 40m x 20m, again subject to the target style dimensions, orientation and depth. • All holes have been geologically logged and provide a strong basis for geological control and continuity of mineralisation. • No Mineral Resource or Ore Reserve estimations are presented for the area the subject of the exploration results. • No sample compositing has been applied except in the reporting of drill intercepts within a single hole, as described in this table. WMC Historical data • The typical drill spacing for the early WMC drill traverses is approximately 120m apart with drillhole spacing along the traverses between 10m and 80m (close spacing where present was due to between one and four wedge holes from each parent hole). These traverses were sometimes infilled to about 60m spacing where drillhole depths were less than approximately450m. |
|
| 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. |
|||
| 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. |
• The preferred orientation of drilling at KNP is designed to intercept the target approximately perpendicular to the strike and dip of the mineralisation where/if known. Subsequent sampling is therefore considered representative of the mineralised zones if/when intersected. • At East Cooee the majority of historical drill holes are collared vertically. • The chance of bias introduced by sample orientation relative to structures, mineralised zones or shears at a low angle to the drillhole is possible, however quantified orientation of the intercepted interval allows this possible bias to be assessed. Where drilling intercepts the interpreted mineralisation as planned, bias is considered non-existent to minimal. |
|
| 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. |
|||
| Sample security | The measures taken to ensure sample security. |
• Samples are collected by Company personnel in calico bags, which are in turn placed in bulka bags which are secured on wooden pallets and transported directly via road freight to the laboratory with a corresponding submission form and consignment note. • The laboratory checks the samples received against the submission form and notifies the Company of any missing or additional samples. Once the laboratory has completed the assaying, the pulp packets, pulp residues and coarse rejects are held in the Laboratory’s secure warehouse until collected by the Company or approved to be discarded. |
P a g e | 19
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary | |
|---|---|---|---|
| WMC Historical data • There is no documentation available at the time of this announcement which describes the historical sample handling and submission protocols during the WMC drilling programmes; however, it is assumed that due care was taken with security of samples during field collection, transport and laboratory analysis. The historical drill core remaining after sampling was stored and catalogued at the KNO core farm (now Gold Fields, St Ives’ core farm) and it remains at this location to the present day. • All drill core retrieved from the core farm and samples collected as part of the Lunnon Metals historical drill core re-sampling programme was done so by the Lunnon Metals Exploration Manager, the Site Representative and/or the Lunnon Metals Field Services Superintendent over a period of time. Once samples had been collected Lunnon Metals staff personally transported the samples on a daily basis in a closed and secure vehicle directly to the Intertek sample preparation facility in Kalgoorlie along with the requisite sample submission forms. Occasionally, collected samples remained overnight at the core farm in a secure locked room before beingtransported to Intertek Kalgoorlie. |
|||
| Audits or reviews |
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. |
• No external audits or reviews have been undertaken at this stage of the programme. WMC Historical data • Cube Consulting Pty Ltd are independent of Lunnon Metals and have been previously retained to complete the grade estimation for nickel mineralisation models and MRE exercises but also to review and comment on the protocols developed by Lunnon Metals to deal with, and thereafter utilise, the historical WMC Resources’ data, in particular the re-sampling and QAQC exercise completed by Lunnon Metals such that the data is capable of being used in accordance with current ASX Listing Rules where applicable and JORC 2012 guidelines and standards for the generation and reporting of MREs. • Cube has documented no fatal flaws in the work completed by Lunnon Metals in this regard. |
P a g e | 20
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
SECTION 2 REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
| 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. |
• The property is located on granted Mining Leases. Although all of the tenements wholly or partially overlap with areas the subject of determined native title rights and interests in the two Ngadju determinations, the company notes that the original grant of the right to mine pre-dates 23 December 1996 and as such section 26D of the Native Title Act will be applied to exempt any future renewals or term extensions from the right to negotiate in Subdivision P of the Act. • The complete area of contiguous tenements that are the subject of this announcement is collectively referred to as the Kambalda Nickel Project (‘KNP’) area. Gold Fields Ltd’s wholly owned subsidiary, St Ives Gold Mining Company Pty Ltd (SIGM) was the registered holder and the beneficial owner of the Project area until the Lunnon Metals IPO. • The rights to nickel and gold on the Project area were governed by an Option and Joint Venture Agreement (‘JVA’) executed between Lunnon Metals and SIGM which, in summary, granted rights to nickel and gold to Lunnon Metals in such a manner and form as if Lunnon Metals were the tenement holder, until such time as the JV farm-in commitments were met at which point the requisite percentage interest (initially 51%) was to be transferred to Lunnon Metals. • Lunnon Metals and SIGM subsequently varied the JVA and executed a Sale and Purchase Agreement whereby Lunnon Metals, upon listing on the ASX, now holds 100% of the rights and title to the Project, its assets and leases, subject to certain select reservations and excluded rights retained by SIGM, principally relating to the right to gold in defined areas and the rights to process any future gold ore mined at their nearby Lefroy Gold Plant. • The KNP comprises 19 tenements, each approximately 1,500 m by 800 m in area, and three tenements on which infrastructure may be placed in the future. The KNP area tenement numbers are as follows: M15/1546; M15/1548; M15/1549; M15/1550; M15/1551; M15/1553; M15/1556; M15/1557; M15/1559; M15/1568; M15/1570; M15/1571; M15/1572; M15/1573; M15/1575; M15/1576; M15/1577; M15/1590; M15/1592; and additional infrastructure tenements: M15/1668; M15/1669; M15/1670. • There are no known impediments to potential future development or operations, subject to relevant regulatory approvals, over the leases where significant results have been reported. • The tenements are in good standing with the Western Australian Department of Mines,IndustryRegulation and Safety. |
| Exploration done by other parties |
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. |
• In relation to nickel mineralisation, WMC, now BHP Nickel West Pty Ltd and a wholly owned subsidiary of BHP Ltd, conducted all relevant exploration, resource estimation, development and mining of the mineralisation at Foster and Jan mines from establishment of the mineral licences through to sale of the properties to SIGM in December 2001. |
P a g e | 21
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| • SIGM has conducted later gold exploration activities on the Project area since 2001, however until nickel focused work recommenced under Lunnon Metals management, no meaningful nickel exploration has been conducted since the time of WMC ownership and only one nickel focussed surface diamond core hole, with two ‘daughter’ wedge holes, have been completed in total since WMC ownership. • Total production from Foster was 61,129 nickel tonnes and from Jan was 30,270 nickel tonnes. |
||
| Geology | Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. |
• The relevant area is host to both typical ‘Kambalda’ style, komatiitic hosted, nickel sulphide deposits and Archaean greenstone gold deposits such as routinely discovered and mined in Kambalda/St Ives district. |
| Drillhole Information |
A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drillholes: • easting and northing of the drillhole collar • elevation or RL (elevation above sea level in metres) of the drillhole collar • dip and azimuth of the hole • down hole length and interception depth hole length. |
• Drill hole collar location and directional information is provided within the body of the report and also within the relevant Additional Details Table in the Annexures. • RC drilling reported herein is included in plan and cross sectional orientation maps where relevant. |
| Data aggregation methods |
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. |
• Grades are reported as intervals recording down-hole length and interpreted true width where this estimation is able to be made. • Any grades composited and reported to represent an interpreted mineralised intercept of significance are reported as drill-length weighted averages over that intercept. • The Company currently considers that grades above 0.5% Ni are worthy of consideration for individual reporting in any announcement of additional details tables provided. • Composite nickel grades may be calculated typically to a 0.5% Ni cut-off with intervals greater than 1.0% reported as “including” in any zones of broader lower grade mineralisation. • Other composite grades may be reported above differing cut-offs to highlight specific, or anomalous intercepts; in such cases the cut off will be specifically stated. • Reported intervals may contain internal waste however the resultant composite must be greater than either the 0.5% Ni or 1.0% Ni as relevant (or the alternatively stated cut-off grade). • As per other Kambalda style nickel sulphide deposits the Lunnon Metals composites reported may include samples of very high nickel grades down to lower grades approaching the 0.5% Ni or 1.0% Ni cut-off as relevant. • Gold assay results, if reported, are done so to a minimum cut-off grade of 1.0g/t Au and maximum internal dilution of 1.0m. • No top-cuts have been applied to reporting of assay results. • No metal equivalent values have been reported. • Other elements of relevance to the reported nickel mineralisation, such as Cu, Co, Fe, Mg and the like, are reported where the nickel grade is considered significant. • % Nickel grade multiplied by metres intersected, termed “%mNi”, maybe shown to summarise or characterise nickelgrade trends, |
P a g e | 22
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| typically in plan or longitudinal projection oriented views. Where done so, the additional details tables in the Annexure reports the relevant intersection as drilled metres@% Ni,for clarity. |
||
| Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths |
If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drillhole 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 (e.g. ‘down hole length, true width not known’). |
• In regard nickel exploration, the general strike and dip of the Lunnon Basalt footwall contact and thus the zones of contact nickel sulphides are considered to be well defined by past drilling which generally allows for true width calculations to be made regardless of the density or angle of drilling. • For nickel and gold exploration, drillhole design seeks to plan the drill holes to be approximately perpendicular to the strike of mineralisation. • Reported intersections are approximate, but may not be true width, as drilling is not always exactly perpendicular to the strike/dip of mineralisation. • Improved estimates of true widths will only be possible when all results are received, and final geological interpretations have been completed. |
| 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 drillhole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. |
• Plans, long projections and sections, where able to clearly represent the results of drilling, are provided in the main body of the report. |
| 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. |
• Drill collar locations of drilling completed by Lunnon Metals are shown in figures and all results of that drilling, including those with no significant assays, are provided in this report. • If relevant, drill holes with pending assays are also shown in figures. • The report is considered balanced and in context. • The Company highlights the historical drill database contains more than 5,000 drillholes and more than 100,000 nickel assays (and more than 145,000 gold assays) and thus summary tables are provided in the Appendices A through D to the independent Technical Assessment Report attached to the Company’s Prospectus lodged with the ASX on 11 June 2021. These Appendices note and record: onickel drillholes with significant assays i.e. the number of drillholes containing at least one assay value greater than or equal to 1.0% Ni versus total number of holes in the database; onumber of nickel assay values greater than or equal to 1.0% in the database; onumber of drillholes containing at least one assay value greater than or equal to 1.0 ppm Au versus total number of holes in the database; and onumber of gold assay values greater than or equal to 1.0 ppm in the database. |
| 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 |
• Drilling across the KNP is on-going. • The KNP has a long history of geological investigation, primarily for nickel, but also gold to a lesser degree. • Datasets pertinent to the KNP that represent other meaningful and material information include: oGeophysics - multiple ground and aerial based surveys of magnetic, gravity, SAM, characteristics oGeochemistry – nickel and gold soil geochemistry datasets across the KNP • Historicalproduction data recordingmetallurgicalperformance of |
P a g e | 23
==> picture [147 x 54] intentionally omitted <==
| Criteria | JORC Code explanation | Commentary |
|---|---|---|
| contaminating substances. | Foster mine nickel delivered to the Kambalda Concentrator. | |
| Further work | The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). |
• The planned two year (June 2021 - June 2023) work programme is summarised in the Prospectus dated 22 April 2021 and announced on the ASX on 11 June 2021. • In general terms, the current nickel mineral resources at Foster are not closed off down plunge and also have potential for further definition drilling up-plunge. Whilst some testing of these areas can be achieved via surface diamond and/or RC drilling, typically it would be undertaken from underground drill platforms which are yet to be established. • In relation to the drilling results reported in this announcement, further RC and DDH (drill type will be subject to the estimated depth to target) will be planned to both infill the drill spacing (RC), collect material for metallurgical testing and provide litho-structural data to aid thegeological modellingandgrade estimationprocess. |
P a g e | 24