Wrap Text
Orion upgrades Mineral Resources at the Flat Mines Area, Okiep Copper Project as BFS nears completion
Orion Minerals Limited
Incorporated in the Commonwealth of Australia
Australian Company Number 098 939 274
ASX share code: ORN
JSE share code: ORN
ISIN: AU000000ORN1
Orion upgrades Mineral Resources at the Flat Mines Area, Okiep Copper Project as BFS nears completion
Other historic mines and prospects also being modelled, with potential to deliver further resource growth
-A review of the geological interpretation at Flat Mine North, Flat Mine East and Flat Mine South has
resulted in improved definition of the mineralised zones together with an increase in the total Mineral
Resources.
-Mineral Resources at Flat Mine North, Flat Mine East and Flat Mine South now total 9.3Mt at 1.3% Cu for
130,000 tonnes of contained copper including a Measured and Indicated Resource of 7.4Mt at 1.4% Cu.
-In addition to the previously announced Mineral Resource of 2.5Mt at 1.4% Cu at Flat Mine (Nababeep),
Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep Kloof Mine, this brings the total Mineral Resources within the Flat Mines
Area of the OCP to 12Mt at 1.4% Cu for 160,000 tonnes of contained copper.
-Other historical mines and prospects are currently being modelled, with the potential to deliver further
growth in the OCP Mineral Resource.
Orion’s Managing Director and CEO, Errol Smart, commented:
“Following a detailed geological review, we have been able to deliver an increase in the total Mineral Resource
for the Flat Mines Area and, more importantly, greater confidence in the resource model. This is a very positive
result which has now been incorporated in the Bankable Feasibility Study (BFS) for the Okiep Copper Project.
“We have now concluded the main body of work for the BFS and we are in the process of handing the study to
the Independent Technical Expert appointed by the debt advisor for the project on behalf of the Industrial
Development Corporation of South Africa Limited and debt financiers who have expressed an interest in funding
the project. The BFS outcomes will be released to the market once the Independent Technical Assessment has
been completed.
“While this initial Resource has been utilised to support a foundation stage BFS and economic assessment of the
Okiep Copper Project, we are confident in the potential to expand these resources with future drilling into the
mineralised envelopes. We see outstanding potential to further grow and upgrade the Mineral Resources with
in-fill drilling into areas with low drill density as well as drilling potential plunge and strike extensions of the known
deposits.
“Most importantly, we are pleased to have concluded the tailings facility design, together with completion of
water management plans in order to submit an application for an Integrated Water Use Licence. This element
of the BFS work has proven to be the most time consuming due to Orion’s focus on high ESG standards.”
Orion Minerals Limited (ASX/JSE: ORN) (Orion or Company) is pleased to report an increase in the Mineral
Resource Estimates for three deposits that form part of the Okiep Copper Project (OCP), located in the Northern
Cape Province of South Africa, following a detailed review of the geology and remodelling of the deposits.
The Measured, Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources, as stated in Table 1 below, have been re-estimated
for the Flat Mine North (FMN), Flat Mine East (FME) and Flat Mine South (FMS) deposits, and now total 9.3Mt
grading 1.3% Cu for 130,000 tonnes of contained copper (Table 1).
Together with the previously reported Mineral Resources for Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and
Nababeep Kloof Mine (refer ASX/JSE release 29 March 2021), these latest resource estimates increase the total
Mineral Resource at the OCP to 12Mt grading 1.4% copper for 160,000 tonnes of contained copper (Table 2).
The Mineral Resource estimations are based on historical drilling data and were estimated by a Competent
Person and classified in accordance with the 2012 Edition of the Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration
Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (JORC code 2012) with supporting information in Appendices 1 and
2.
Updated FMN, FME and FMS Mineral Resource
The Mineral Resource consists of three separate mineralised deposits in close proximity to each other (FMN, FME,
and FMS). Following an extended period of detailed review resulting in an increased understanding of the
regional geology, the local geology and the controls on mineralisation, new interpretations were completed for
the FMN, FME and FMS deposits. The new interpretations have significantly improved the definition of the
estimation domains at FME and, to a lesser extent, at FMS. This is particularly relevant in areas of the deposits
where there is a lower density of drill hole information. For FMN, where there is a higher density of drill hole
information, the changes to the interpreted estimation domains are less pronounced.
The changes to the resource models successfully increased the FMN, FME and FMS total Mineral Resource from
8.9Mt grading 1.4% Cu (refer ASX/JSE release 10 February 2021) to 9.3Mt grading 1.3% Cu, including Measured
and Indicated Resources of 7.4Mt grading 1.4% Cu and Inferred Resources of 2.0 Mt grading 1.3% Cu.
The Measured and Indicated Resources show a decrease of 1.1Mt from 8.5Mt grading 1.4% Cu (refer ASX/JSE
release 10 February 2021). This is a direct result of the changes in the resource models due to the increase in
understanding of the geology and mineralisation models combined with a different Mineral Resource estimation
methodology.
The FMN, FME and FMS Mineral Resources shown in Table 1 are based on drilling data available for the Flat Mines
Southern African Tantalum Mining (Pty) Ltd (SAFTA) Mining Right NC30/5/1/2/2/10150MR. The Mineral Resources
are reported in accordance with the JORC Code (2012), with supporting information provided in Appendices 1
and 2.
Several other historical mines and prospects are currently being modelled, with the potential to deliver further
growth in the OCP Mineral Resource.
Table 1: Mineral Resource Statement for the Flat Mine North, Flat Mine East and Flat Mine South.
Measured Indicated Inferred
Mine / Prospect
Tonnes % Cu t Cu Tonnes % Cu t Cu Tonnes % Cu t Cu
Flat Mine North 440,000 1.13 5,000 940,000 1.42 13,000 200,000 1.5 4,000
Flat Mine East - - - 3,400,000 1.37 47,000 1,000,000 1.0 9,000
Flat Mine South - - - 2,600,000 1.35 35,000 800,000 1.6 13,000
Total* 440,000 1.13 5,000 6,900,000 1.37 95,000 2,000,000 1.3 26,000
*Numbers may not add up due to rounding in accordance with the JORC code guidance.
Resources are reported at a 0.7% Cu cut-off grade.
Figure 1: SAFTA prospecting and mining rights showing previously reported (orange) and updated (blue) Mineral Resources.
Table 2: Total Mineral Resource Statement for the Flat Mines Area of the OCP.
Measured Indicated Inferred
Mine / Prospect
Tonnes % Cu t Cu Tonnes % Cu t Cu Tonnes % Cu t Cu
Flat Mine (Nababeep) - - - - - - 1,000,000 1.4 15,000
Jan Coetzee Mine - - - - - - 1,000,000 1.4 14,000
Nababeep Kloof Mine - - - - - - 500,000 1.2 6,000
Flat Mine North 440,000 1.13 5,000 940,000 1.42 13,000 200,000 1.5 4,000
Flat Mine East - - - 3,400,000 1.37 47,000 1,000,000 1.0 9,000
Flat Mine South - - - 2,600,000 1.35 35,000 800,000 1.6 13,000
Total 440,000 1.13 5,000 6,900,000 1.37 95,000 4,500,000 1.3 61,000
*Numbers may not add up due to rounding in accordance with the JORC code guidance.
Resources are reported at a 0.7% Cu cut-off grade.
Geology and Interpretation
The Okiep Copper Deposits are Orogenic-type copper deposits hosted in mafic to ultra-mafic intrusive bodies in
the western part of the Namaqua Complex, South Africa. Mines in the Okiep district produced 106Mt at 1.7% Cu
since the 1900s1.
1Lombaard A.F,, in Annhauser C.R., and Maske S. (eds). The Copper Deposits of the Okiep Copper District, Namaqualand in Mineral
Deposits of Southern Africa. 1982 pp 1421 - 1445.
Copper deposits are hosted by east-trending mafic/ultramafic dykes and sills. Some 1,700 of these intrusions
occur in the district. A structural control on intrusives in the form of “steep structures” or monoclinal folds is well
established. Copper mineralisation occurs as disseminations of chalcopyrite and bornite with local massive
sulphide concentrations within and adjoining mafic intrusive bodies.
The best analogue to the Okiep copper district is probably the copper district of the Curaçá River Valley in Brazil 2,
which hosts deposits of 180Mt of copper sulphide grading 1% copper, including 5Mt of copper oxide material at
a grade of 0.6% Cu². Production came from both underground and surface workings.
Mineralisation at FMN, FME and FMS is hosted by shallow, sub-surface bodies.
FMN consists of three mineralised bodies within a continuous mafic intrusive. The southern and central bodies
striking north-south for approximately 280m and 260m respectively, with a shallow dip of approximately 15° to
the north. There is a gap of approximately 80m between the northernmost limit of the southern body and the
southernmost limit of the central body. There is continuity of mineralisation between the central body and the
northern body which is flat-lying with and has an east-west strike of 340m. FMN extends from surface to a known
maximum depth of 230m. An existing decline extends from the south of the southern body to the southern section
of the central body. The decline is in extremely good condition indicating strong geotechnical conditions.
Mineralisation at FME consists of two en-echelon “eastern bodies” with a strike of 560m and an average dip of
55° to the north-northwest. The eastern bodies extend from 50m to 330m below surface. A separate “western
body” has a strike of 320m and a dip of 65° to the north-northwest. The western body extends from 100m below
surface to 400m.
FMS has an east-west strike of approximately 580m and dips steeply at approximately 75° to the north. The body
extends from 140m to 700m below surface.
Estimation Methodology
The following estimation methods were applied:
• Mineralisation often occurs as discrete mineralised lenses within and normally following the general trend
of a broader mafic intrusive body. With the irregular intrusive nature of the geology and mineralisation it
can be difficult to correlate individual lenses between sections and drillholes and in many cases modelling
of estimation domains was only feasible by grouping the lenses into a broader envelope.
• A 0.5% Cu cut-off grade was selected for the outer limit of the estimation domain. From visual observation,
using a cut-off grade above 0.5% Cu, the mineralisation lacks the required continuity to construct a viable
domain for resource estimation. In addition, in some areas the 0.5% Cu cut-off was lowered (often in
sections where all grades are below 0.5% Cu but still anomalous and in the mafic lithologies associated
with the mineralisation), or significant internal waste was included in the mineralisation envelope, in order
to maintain continuity and a viable domain for resource estimation. Estimation domains for all three
deposits (FMN, FME and FMS) were delineated by creating interpreted strings along successive vertical
sections.
• Detailed modelling of lithological units was not possible over any significant extent due to the irregular
intrusive nature of the geology. Modelling of internal “waste pillars” (mostly associated with granitic
inclusions within the mafic bodies) as a separate domain for estimation was only possible to a meaningful
extent at the FME eastern bodies. In other areas it was difficult to correlate internal waste zones between
drillholes over any significant distance.
• No differentiation was made between the oxide and sulphide mineralisation as generally the oxide
component is insignificant within the Flat Mines deposits.
• Sample lengths for FMN and FME were composited to 2m, while samples for FMS were composited to 1.5m.
2
Hasui Y.,Del’Rey L.J.H., Silva F. J.L., Mandetta P., De Moraes J. A. C., De Oliveira J. G., and Miola W. Geology and Copper Mineralisation of
Curaçá River Valley in Bahia. Revista Brasileira de Geodencias vol 12(1-3) March 1982.
• Copper assay values were capped to selected thresholds using the Parker3 methodology. For FMN, three
samples were capped to 11.79% Cu. For FME eastern bodies, six sample were capped to 11.62% Cu, and
for FME western body, one sample was capped to 2.16% Cu. No capping was necessary for Cu for FMS.
• Block models with the following cell size and sub-cell size were used for the FMN, FME and FMS deposits:
Deposit Block Cell Size Sub-Cell Size
FMN 30m (X) x 30m (Y) x 8m (Z) 1m x 1m x 1m
FME 30m (X) x 8m (Y) x 30m (Z) 1m x 1m x 1m
FMS 30m (X) x 6m (Y) x 30m (Z) 1m x 1m x 1m
• Following a spatial analysis, the composite data were used to estimate the block grades using ordinary
kriging (OK) where this was considered appropriate. Blocks that were not estimated by the first-pass OK
were estimated using the first-pass estimates as input to a moving average.
• For FMN, neighbourhood analysis resulted in an optimum search neighbourhood of 45m x 25m x 8m for
local block estimation. The second-pass estimates were calculated from the first-pass OK estimates using
a moving average technique with the search radii doubled. 72% of blocks (94% of the volume) were
estimated by the first-pass, with the remaining blocks estimated by the second-pass.
• For FME eastern bodies, neighbourhood analysis resulted in an optimum search neighbourhood of 100m
x 5m for local block estimation. The second-pass estimates were calculated from the first-pass OK
estimates using a moving average technique with the search radii doubled. 93% of blocks were
estimated by the first-pass, with the remaining blocks estimated by the second-pass. For the waste pillars
a length-weighted average grade was applied.
• For FME western body there is a lower sample density and no clear spatial relationship between samples.
Local block estimation using OK was not feasible and an inverse distance weighting (to a power of two)
(IDW²) approach was utilised instead. The FME eastern bodies Cu% ranges of 100m x 100m x 5.8m were
applied. The IDW² estimate resulted in 60% of blocks being estimated in the first-pass. The second-pass
was populated using a moving average with the first-pass estimates as the input data.
• For FMS, neighbourhood analysis resulted in an optimum search neighbourhood of 70m x 70 x 5.5m for
local block estimation. The second-pass estimates were calculated from the first-pass OK estimates using
a moving average technique with the search radii increased. 54% of blocks were estimated by the first-
pass, with the remaining blocks estimated by the subsequent passes.
• Bulk Densities (t/m3) were determined using the water displacement method. For FMN there was a good
spread of density measurements through the deposit with a total of 549 data points. For FMS there are 79
density measurements, but these are restricted to the shallower holes in the deposit. For FME eastern
bodies there are no recorded density measurements with 43 measurements in the FME western body.
• For FMN density outliers, higher values were capped using the Parker³ methodology to 3.17t/m?, while
lower values were capped up to 2.53 t/m?. For FME eastern bodies, density values were assigned to
logged lithologies based on density statistics from FMN, where host lithologies are similar. No capping was
applied to density values for FME or FMS.
• For FMN, OK was applied for bulk density estimation with a search neighbourhood of 45m x 23m x 11m.
The first-pass resulted in 53% of blocks estimated. A second-pass using first-pass estimates as input data
using a moving average with the search radii doubled populated the remainder of the blocks.
• For FME main bodies, block density was calculated using IDW². The orientation and range of the search
neighbourhood was defined by the Cu % models, i.e. a search range of 100m x 100m x 5.8m orientated
in the plane of the orebody as defined by the experimental variography for the FME Cu % analysis. For
FME western bodies, the same search neighbourhood search was used for IDW². A second-pass was done
from using first-pass block estimates and a moving average with the search radii doubled.
• For FMS IDW² was used using FMS Cu% variogram ranges in the plane of mineralisation. The first-pass
estimated only 10% of the parent blocks. The first-pass estimates were used as input to a moving average
to inform the remainder of the blocks.
• DatamineTM was utilised to create a block model and measure individual block volumes within each zone
and these data were imported into IsatisTM for further analysis.
3
Parker, H. Statistical treatment of outlier data in epithermal gold deposit reserve estimation. Mathematical Geology, Vol23. 175-199, 1991.
In the Competent Person’s opinion, the estimation methodologies are suitable for the type of deposit and nature
of the data and can be used to classify the estimate in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).
Resource Classification
The Resource classification has been carried out in accordance with the JORC Code (2012).
The resources are classified as Measured, Indicated and Inferred. Cognisance was taken of the potential
uncertainties related to mineralised envelope delineation and therefore the associated volume estimation, as
well as that this resource estimation is based on historical data.
The geological models are considered by the Competent Person to be defined to an acceptable level and
there is sufficiently accurate data to produce local block estimates using ordinary kriging in all areas apart from
FME western body where there is a lower data density and IDW² estimation was employed. In areas where there
is a limited number of samples resources are defined as Inferred.
Although there is a moderate level of uncertainty associated with the estimation of bulk densities at FMS and
FME, the common lithologies associated with the mineralisation have a relatively narrow range of density values.
In most parts of the deposits there are sufficient data for reasonably accurate local block estimates of grade
(FMN 72%; FME 93%; FMS 54% of blocks populated by first-pass kriging). The kriging performance parameters, e.g.
slope of regression, together with an assessment of the areas of blocks that were populated by first-pass kriging,
were utilised to make a distinction between the Measured, Indicated and Inferred levels of confidence.
Twin and some infill drilling will be required to increase the confidence and upgrade the Inferred Resources. The
results conform to the view of the Competent Person.
Cut-off Grades
A cut-off of 0.7% Cu was used for the Mineral Resource Statement that corresponds with reasonable prospects
of economic extraction using today’s economics. This is based on the break-even grade resulting from the
financial model used for the Scoping Study (refer ASX/JSE release 3 May 2021).
Mining, Metallurgical Methods and Modifying Factors
Potential mining of these three deposits is considered suitable for underground operations.
Historically mined areas (stopes) shown on mine survey plans were excluded from the resource. This is only
applicable for FMN where approximately 180,000 tonnes of ore are recorded to have been historically mined.
No historical metallurgical test results are available apart from a locked-cycle test carried out by SAFTA in 2018.
Based on this single test, indications are that recoveries in excess of 90% with concentrate grades in excess of
21% should be readily achievable. Since 1946, OCC mined and treated 105.6Mt from 27 different mines all with
similar and amenable metallurgy.
The only test work caried out by Orion has been XRF ore sorting test work by RADOS. Work is ongoing but results
show significant benefits to XRF sorting of the ore.
Future Activities
Some twin and in-fill drilling will be required to increase the confidence and upgrade the Inferred Resources. A
Feasibility Study is currently underway which will determine the viability for mining of the FMN, FME and FMS
Mineral Resources.
For and on behalf of the Board.
Errol Smart
Managing Director and CEO
28 August 2023
ENQUIRIES
Investors Media JSE Sponsor
Errol Smart – Managing Director & CEO Nicholas Read Monique Martinez
Denis Waddell – Chairman Read Corporate, Australia Merchantec Capital
T: +61 (0) 3 8080 7170 T: +61 (0) 419 929 046 T: +27 (0) 11 325 6363
E: info@orionminerals.com.au E: nicholas@readcorporate.com.au E: monique.martinez@merchantec.com
Competent Persons Statement
The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on information compiled by Mr Paul Matthews
(Pr.Sci.Nat.), a Competent Person who is a member of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals, a
Recognised Professional Organisation (RPO). Mr Matthews is a full-time employee of Orion. Mr Matthews has sufficient
experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity being
undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the JORC Code. Mr Matthews consents to the
inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.
The information in this report that relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr Sean Duggan, a
Competent Person who is a Director and Principal Analyst at Z Star Mineral Resource Consultants (Pty) Ltd. Mr Duggan
(Pr.Sci.Nat) is registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (Registration No. 400035/01), an RPO.
Mr Duggan has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration
and to the activity being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the JORC Code. Mr
Duggan consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in
which it appears and detailed in Appendix 1 and 2.
Disclaimer
This release may include forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements may include, among other things,
statements regarding targets, estimates and assumptions in respect of metal production and prices, operating costs and
results, capital expenditures, mineral reserves and mineral resources and anticipated grades and recovery rates, and are or
may be based on assumptions and estimates related to future technical, economic, market, political, social and other
conditions. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s expectations and beliefs concerning future
events. Forward-looking statements inherently involve subjective judgement and analysis and are necessarily subject to risks,
uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Orion. Actual results and developments may vary
materially from those expressed in this release. Given these uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance
on such forward-looking statements. Orion makes no undertaking to subsequently update or revise the forward-looking
statements made in this release to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this release. All information in respect of
Exploration Results and other technical information should be read in conjunction with Competent Person Statements in this
release (where applicable). To the maximum extent permitted by law, Orion and any of its related bodies corporate and
affiliates and their officers, employees, agents, associates and advisers:
• disclaim any obligations or undertaking to release any updates or revisions to the information to reflect any change in
expectations or assumptions;
• do not make any representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the
information in this release, or likelihood of fulfilment of any forward-looking statement or any event or results expressed
or implied in any forward-looking statement; and
• disclaim all responsibility and liability for these forward-looking statements (including, without limitation, liability for
negligence).
Appendix 1: Maps and Figures
Figure 2: Flat Mine North defined estimation domains, drill hole traces and existing mine workings.
Figure 3: Flat Mine East defined estimation domains, drill hole traces.
Figure 4: Flat Mine South defined estimation domain, drill hole traces.
Appendix 2: The following tables are provided to ensure compliance with the JORC Code (2012) requirements for the reporting of Mineral Resources for
the Okiep Copper Project.
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
(Criteria in this section apply to all succeeding sections.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Sampling techniques • Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or Drilling and sampling was undertaken during three distinct periods since the
specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate initial discovery of mineralisation:
to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes,
or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be • Prior to 1984 by O’Okiep Copper Company (OCC) under ownership of
taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. Newmont.
• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity • 1984 – 1999 by OCC under ownership of Goldfields of South Africa
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. (GFSA).
• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the • and in 2018 by South Africa Tantalum Mining (SAFTA).
Public Report.
Newmont and GFSA:
• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would b
e m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge • For diamond drilling carried out by OCC between 1953 and 1978, there
for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such is limited information available on sampling techniques for core. With
as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. exploration and resource management being carried out under the
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) supervision of OCC, it is considered by the Competent Person that there ¯
may warrant disclosure of detailed information. would be procedures in place to the industry best practice standard at
that time. This is based on discussions with personnel employed by OCC.
• The exploration and resource management were under the supervision
of the OCC geology department, recognised as one of the best
exploration departments in South Africa at the time. OCC was successful
in defining resources which were used as the basis of successful mine
development for 33 different mines for an operation over a 45-year
period.
• GFSA is a reputable South African Mining house and owned gold, base
metal and platinum mines at the time.
• Drilling of exploration holes was carried out on a 60m by 30m line spacing.
• Drill samples from OCC and GFSA drilling were all sent to OCC on-mine
laboratory in Nababeep.
• Samples were taken over two metre intervals adjusted to accommodate
geological contacts. OCC whole core was submitted to the laboratory
(AX core size). A 10cm representative core was archived for each
sample.
• GFSA drilled BQ size core. Core was cut with a core cutter at the core
yard and half core was submitted over the entire sample interval.
• For both companies, samples were numbered and bagged at the core
yard before being submitted to the laboratory.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• No formal QC samples were inserted at the time by the geologists on the
exploration site. OCC laboratory developed its own standards, and those
were used internally in the laboratory. No record exists on the preparation
method of the standards. Duplicate samples were also inserted to check
for repeatability. No records exist on the percentage duplicate or
standard.
• No historical Standard Operating Procedures are available.
SAFTA:
• Diamond core samples were demarcated and collected across all
visible mineralisation estimated at least 0.05% Cu.
• At least 1m hanging and footwall material were also sampled.
• The average sample length is approximately 1m with minor variations to
accommodate geological boundaries.
• Sampling was carried-out by an experienced sampler/geologist
according to Standard Operating Procedures (SOP).
• Sampling of the mineralised drill core was of high standard and found
suitable for estimation purposes.
• QC samples were inserted and the records are available.
Drilling techniques • Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air Newmont:
blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other • All intersections were by core drilling.
type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.).
• AX-size core was drilled.
• Core orientation was not done.
GFSA:
• All intersections were by core drilling.
• BQ core size was drilled.
• No core orientation was carried out.
SAFTA:
• Recent twin drilling consisted of an upper percussion portion followed by
a diamond tail.
• The diamond tail commenced when either significant deviation was
encountered or until 2m to 3m above the targeted mineralisation.
• NQ size diamond core drilling followed and intersected the targeted
mineralisation.
• The shallower holes at Flat Mine North commenced with NXC size for 2m
to 5m followed by NQ drilling.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Drill sample recovery • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries Newmont:
and results assessed.
• All mineralised intersections were done with core drilling.
• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
representative nature of the samples. • Core stick-ups reflecting the depth of the drill hole are recorded at the
rig at the end of each core “run”.
• Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade
and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential • A block with the depth of the hole written on it is placed in the core box
loss/gain of fine/coarse material. at the end of each run.
• Core recoveries were measured for each run.
• No records exist for core recoveries on individual samples.
• Intersections were in hard rock and good recoveries are envisaged
through the mineralisation.
GFSA:
• All mineralised intersections are done with core drilling.
• Core stick-ups reflecting the depth of the drill hole are recorded at the
rig at the end of each core run.
• A block with the depth of the hole written on it is placed in the core box
at the end of each run.
• At the core yard, the length of core in the core box is measured for each
run. The measured length of core is subtracted from the length of the run
as recorded from the stick-up measured at the rig to determine the core
lost.
• Core recoveries were done for individual samples.
• Intersections were in hard rock and good recoveries are encountered
through the mineralisation.
SAFTA:
• Core is carefully packed, marked and measured in order to determine
core recoveries according to SOP.
• Recoveries are recorded as part of the geological and sampling logs.
• Core stick-ups reflecting the depth of the drill hole are recorded at the
rig at the end of each core run.
• A block with the depth of the hole written on it is placed in the core box
at the end of each run.
• Core recoveries were measured for each run.
• The recent twin drill program recorded excellent recoveries, with an
average of 98.1%.
• Excellent recoveries are due to highly competent rocks and a low
weathering profile.
• Good recoveries are obtained within the mineralised zones and no
sample bias occurred.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Logging
• Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and Newmont and GFSA:
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate
Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. • All relevant intersections for surface holes have been logged by qualified
geologists and all of this information is available.
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
costean, channel, etc.) photography. • No geotechnical information is available for the historic drill holes.
• The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. • Core was not photographed.
• Logs were recorded in the core yard on standard log sheets.
• Quantitative estimates of sulphide mineralogy were done.
• Core of the entire drill hole length was geologically logged and recorded
on standardised log sheets by qualified geologists.
• No air drilling was carried out.
SAFTA:
• RC drill hole chips and core were logged by experienced and qualified
geologists.
• All diamond core was logged, recorded and digitally captured.
• Core was photographed.
• Standard codes describing lithology, alteration, mineralisation and
structure were applied.
• Structural measurements were collected from orientated core for all but
2 drill holes completed.
• A total of 13 twin holes were drilled resulting in approximately 1,260
percussion and 1,109 diamond core metres logged.
• All the twinning holes were geotechnical logged (RQD).
• Two holes were abandoned.
Sub-sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core Newmont:
techniques and taken.
sample preparation • All sample data are available.
• If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and
whether sampled wet or dry. • Whole core was used for assaying.
• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the • The entire sample length was submitted to the laboratory except for a
sample preparation technique. 10cm piece of core retained as a reference.
• Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to • Sample preparation was undertaken by the OCC Laboratory.
maximise representivity of samples.
• The retention of the 10cm length of core from each sample will not result
• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in- in maximum representativity of samples. However, this methodology was
situ material collected, including for instance results for field employed for numerous prospects which were successfully mined.
duplicate/second-half sampling.
• No certified reference material, blanks or duplicates were inserted,
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material however the OCC laboratory inserted in-house standard reference
being sampled. material with each batch.
GFSA:
• NQ core was cut at the core yard and half core taken as a sample.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• With core samples, the entire sample length is cut and sampled.
• No CRMs, blanks or duplicates were inserted, however the OCC
laboratory inserted in-house standard reference material with each
batch.
SAFTA:
• The sampling method is considered appropriate for this type of
mineralisation.
• Mineralisation is generally massive to disseminated.
• Field duplicates consisted of identical quartered core of initial sampling.
• NQ Core was halved and quartered by diamond saw.
• CRMs, blanks and field duplicates were inserted.
Quality of assay data • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and Newmont and GFSA:
and laboratory tests laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered
partial or total. • No records exist for laboratory procedures for the OCC laboratory.
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., • No geophysical tools, spectrometers or handheld XRF instruments were
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument used.
make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
derivation, etc. • No record is available on quality control methods.
• Nature of quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable SAFTA:
levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been
established. • No geophysical tools, spectrometers or handheld XRF instruments were
used for grade determination.
• Samples from the 2018 twin drilling program were analysed by the
ISO17025 accredited ALS laboratory (ALS) in Johannesburg, South Africa.
• Samples were crushed and pulverised to 85% passing <75µm.
• Samples were analysed using the ME-OG62 4 Acid digestion method and
finished by ICP-AES.
• Assay precision is within 7-10% with a lower detection limit of 10ppm
(0.001%) Cu.
• The quality of assay data / results was monitored by insertion of
approximately 5% CRMs, 5% Blanks and 5% field duplicates.
• At least five different and applicable CRMs were used, two low grade
(<1% Cu) and three medium grade (1% – 2% Cu).
• A total of 422 samples were analysed, including 24 blanks, 21 CRMs, 17
duplicates, 15 coarse rejects and 11 pulp duplicates.
• All but two CRM results were within the accepted two standard deviation
limits.
• The blanks performed exceptionally well, denoting a low level of
contamination of sample preparation.
• Field duplicates showed good correlation with only two samples slightly
off the linear regression curve.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• Pulp duplicates (eleven in total, one from each hole) across the broad
range of grades were renumbered and submitted to ALS and the same
analytical method. A very good correlation was obtained.
• 16 Reject samples were re-analysed by ALS, a good correlation was
obtained.
• Limited data swap and labelling errors were encountered and rectified.
• Blanks, standards and duplicates comprised 15% of all field samples, the
total QC samples comprised 21% of the entire 422 samples dispatched.
Flat Mine North (FMN):
• A total of 335 samples from 9 drill holes were submitted, including 17
CRMs, 17 blanks and 13 duplicates.
Flat Mine East (FME):
• No twin holes were drilled.
Flat Mine South (FMS):
• A total of 102 samples from 2 drill holes were submitted including 4 CRMs,
7 blanks and 4 duplicates.
Verification of • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or Newmont and GFSA:
sampling and alternative company personnel.
assaying • No records are available on the verification of data.
• The use of twinned holes.
• Exploration was managed by the OCC and GFSA exploration
• Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data departments, consisting of qualified geologists.
verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
• No adjustments to assay data were reported.
• Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
SAFTA:
• 13 Twin drill holes were drilled, 10 at FMN and 3 at FMS.
• Records of verification data/samples are available.
• Verification samples were submitted to a second laboratory, namely
Intertek, Australia.
• A subset of approximately 5% of the total samples across the grade
spectrum was submitted and analysed.
• The 22 samples and one CRM were assays by the 4AO/OM method, i.e.
4 Acid digest and ICP-OES finish.
• The verification samples showed excellent correlation with original ALS
analyses.
Location of data points • Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and Newmont and GFSA:
down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used
in Mineral Resource estimation. • Drill hole collars were surveyed by qualified surveyors and documented
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• Specification of the grid system used.
in a Survey Logbook.
• Quality and adequacy of topographic control.
• All surface and underground drill hole collars were surveyed by qualified
surveyors using a theodolite.
• The historic mine survey data is in the old national LO 17 Clarke 1880
system coordinate system.
• Down-hole surveys were carried using an Eastman survey instrument and
documented and filed. Plans and sections were meticulously plotted
and signed off by a certified surveyor.
SAFTA:
• The 2018 twin drill hole collars were located using a differential GPS by a
qualified surveyor.
• The down-hole surveys of 4 holes of the drilling program were surveyed
using the open hole magnetically compensated “Peewee” instrument.
• The rest of the holes were surveyed by the non-magnetic “Devico” survey
instrument by an independent survey company.
• The WGS84 / Hartebeeshoek LO17 coordinate system was used for all the
survey data of the project.
• A drone derived topographic map (DTM) with 5m contours was used.
• The coordinates and elevations of the collars are within reasonable
margin of error and considered adequate for Mineral Resource
estimation.
Data spacing and • Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.
distribution Newmont and GFSA:
• Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the
degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral • Original exploration holes were drilled aiming to achieve a 60m by 30m
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications spacing, considered appropriate for Mineral Resource estimation of this
applied. type of mineralisation.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
SAFTA:
• No resource definition holes were drilled, twin holes were drilled at FMN
and FMS to confirm and verify historical drilling and data.
• Twin hole locations were selected based on historically drill data and
accessibility.
• 10 Holes were drilled at FMN and 3 at FMS, no twin holes were drilled at
FME.
• The historically 15m drill line spacing is considered to be applicable to
geological and grade continuity of this type of mineralisation.
• The twin holes, although limited, has provided a good degree of
confidence of the grade distribution and geological model.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Orientation of data in • Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of Newmont and GFSA:
relation to geological possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering
structure the deposit type. • Historical drilling is generally oriented perpendicular, or at a maximum
achievable angle to, the attitude of the mineralisation.
• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a • As a result, most holes intersect the mineralisation at an acceptable
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. angle.
• No sampling bias is anticipated as a result of drill hole orientations.
SAFTA:
• The twinning drill holes were drilled from surface at inclinations ranging
between -60° and -78°.
• Generally, the mineralisation is steeply dipping to the north with some
occasional flatter dipping mineralised bodies at FMN.
• Drill intercepts range between 70 – 100% of the true widths and are
considered to be representative and unbiased.
• Only 2 holes had excessive lateral deviation and the intercepts not as
perpendicular to strike and dip of the mineralisation as planned.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. Newmont and GFSA:
• No details of sample security are available. However, during the mining
operations, the site was fenced and gated with security personnel
employed as part of the staff.
SAFTA:
• Core and sampling storage was at a secure location.
• Sample security and storage followed standard procedures.
• Samples were properly bagged, tagged and sealed with cable ties.
• Samples were handed over by the site geologist and shipped via couriers
to the laboratories.
• Laboratories received all samples in good order and no breaches where
reported.
• Records of chain of custody exist.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. Newmont and GFSA:
• No audits and/or review records or documentation are available.
SAFTA:
• Drilling procedures, sample collection and preparation techniques were
audited by external and independent consulting exploration and
resource geologists.
• Site visits were undertaken to review adherence to the SOPs.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• The drill hole database was reviewed.
• QA and QC sample collection protocols where reviewed, interrogated
and found to be adequate for inclusion of the data in the resource
estimation.
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in the preceding section also apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mineral tenement and • Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including • The mineral rights to the properties are vested in the State and the
land tenure status agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, Minerals and Petroleum Development Act, 2002, (MPRDA) regulates the
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, exploration and mining industry in South Africa.
wilderness or national park and environmental settings.
Newmont and GFSA:
• 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. • OCC and GFSA held vast areas under prospecting and mining rights,
most of these have been relinquished.
ORION:
• A mining right, NC30/5/1/2/2/10150MR, in accordance with section 23 of
the MPRDA; was granted to Southern African Tantalum Mining (Pty) Ltd
(SAFTA) to mine for a period of fifteen years on 28 July 2022.
• The right is for copper and tungsten ore for a portion of portion 3, a
portion of portion 13, a portion of portion 14 and a portion of portion 21
of the farm Nababeep No 134 situated within the administrative district
of Namaqualand. The total area measures 1,214Ha in extent.
• A prospecting right application NC30/5/1/1/2/12850MR in accordance
with section 16 of the MPRDA was submitted to the authorities for the
same area as the mining right application for 5 years for 26 additional
minerals including gold and silver. The application was accepted on 21
July 2021.
• Orion acquired 53.6% of the project through the SAFTA-Orion Acquisition
Agreement (refer ASX release 2 August 2021). The remaining 46.7% is held
by the Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa (IDC).
Applications for Section 11 consent to cede the rights to New Okiep
Mining Company (Pty) Ltd (NOMC) are submitted once each right is
granted and are in process.
• The area was mined historically for copper.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Exploration done by • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. Newmont and GFSA:
other parties
• Underground and especially surface geological mapping are of high
quality and detail.
• Historical data included in this resource estimation were generated by
OCC and GFSA.
• Later limited follow-up exploration was completed by Metorex.
• It is evident that the historical data was collected via industry best
practices and are considered suitable and acceptable for resource
estimation.
Geology • Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. O’Okiep Copper District (OCD):
• These Cu deposits are part of the well-known Namaqualand
Metamorphic Complex which consists primarily of meta-volcanic
sedimentary and intrusive rock types.
• Copper mineralisation is primarily associated with irregular, elongated
and steeply dipping Koperberg Suite mafic intrusives.
• The Koperberg Suite intrusives are mainly restricted to so-called “Steep
Structure” of extensive strike lengths and steeply dipping to the north.
• The Koperberg Suite consists of anorthosite, diorite and norite
intermediate rock types.
• Mineralisation usually occurs as blebs to disseminated Cu mineral
assemblages bornite > chalcopyrite > chalcocite and less pyrite and
pyrrhotite.
• The more mafic and magnetite-rich lithologies generally host the bulk of
and higher grade mineralisation.
• The OCD has a long exploration and mining history, and the geology is
well known and understood.
Drill hole Information • A summary of all information material to the understanding of the Newmont and GFSA:
exploration results including a tabulation of the following information
• All historical grade and density information are incorporated in the
for all Material drill holes: database, and due to the large number of intersections made it is in the
Competent Person view that it should not be included in this table.
o easting and northing of the drill hole collar
• Historically 483 holes were drilled totalling 127,278m, most are AQ except
o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in for NQ and BQ close to the collars.
metres) of the drill hole collar
• All drill hole collars were surveyed.
o dip and azimuth of the hole
• Down-hole surveys are available for the majority of the historical GFSA
o down hole length and interception depth holes, a few are missing at FMS.
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
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
explain why this is the case. SAFTA:
• 13 Twin holes and 2,370m were drilled in 2018.
• Down hole surveys are available for 11 of the 13 twin holes. The other two
holes were abandoned.
Data aggregation • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, Newmont and GFSA:
methods maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high
grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Individual intersections were weighted by sample width.
• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade • Mineralised sample lengths were erratically standardised at 1.0m, 1.5m
results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for and 2.0m.
such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of
such aggregations should be shown in detail. • No truncations have been applied.
• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values SAFTA:
should be clearly stated. • Individual intersections were weighted by sample width.
• Mineralised sample lengths were standardised at 1.0m intervals within the
mineralised zones with small variations allowing for lithological
boundaries.
• No truncations have been applied.
Relationship between • These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Newmont and GFSA:
mineralisation widths Exploration Results.
and intercept lengths • Historical drilling is generally oriented perpendicular, or at a maximum
• If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle achievable angle to, the attitude of the mineralisation.
is known, its nature should be reported.
• Generally, drill hole inclinations ranged between -55° to 80°.
• 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 • For the shallower historical, the true widths are 70 to 100% of the down-
width not known’). hole intercepts, especially at the flatter dipping mineralised zones of
FMN.
• The deeper historical holes have more acute intercept angles since the
mineralised zones are much steeper at depth.
SAFTA:
• For the shallower twin holes, the true widths are 70 to 100% of the down-
hole intercepts, especially at the flatter dipping mineralised zones of
FMN.
• Down-hole lengths are reported.
Diagrams • Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of • Numerous plans and cross-sections are available and were utilised during
intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being the geological and mineralisation modelling.
reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. • All historical data is available as hard copies and is currently being
digitised and incorporated into a GIS system.
Balanced reporting • Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades • This resource estimation is based on all available and verified historical
and 2018 twin drilling data.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of • Although limited, statistical comparisons of matching twin and historical
Exploration Results. holes indicates a close correlation.
• Peer review of the geological modelling and resource estimation has
found it to be a reasonable assessment of the mineralisation.
Other substantive • Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported • Detailed surface maps and drill sections were extensively consulted and
exploration data including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical utilised in the understanding of geology and mineralisation.
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, • Regional and detailed geophysical maps (magnetic) were also
groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential consulted.
deleterious or contaminating substances.
• Historical surface and down-hole geophysical work were executed to
industry best practices.
Further work 1. The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral • More twinning of historical drill holes is needed in order to improve
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). confidence in the historical data, especially at FME where no twinning
has taken place.
2. Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, • Deeper mineralisation as well as en-echelon type mineralised lenses are
provided this information is not commercially sensitive. potentially present and should be further investigated.
FMN:
• Closely spaced drilling is required to bridge the gap at the northern end
of the southern body.
FME:
• Delineation drilling of higher grade lenses down plunge and up dip is
required.
• Gaps exist and in-fill drilling is required to establish continuity and
delineate potential extensions and upgrade to Indicated Resources of
higher confidence.
FMS:
• The deeper westerly portions require in-fill drilling as the current drill
spacing is too wide.
• Upgrading Inferred Resources to Indicated also requires additional in-fill
drilling.
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 integrity • Measures taken to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for • Historical data has been digitally captured from hand-written
example, transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection documents, plans and sections.
and its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.
• All data are presented and stored in a MS Access database.
• Data validation procedures used.
• Integrity checks by the CP have found the database to be an accurate
representation of the original data.
• Data checking and corrections were also made in Datamine Studio
3.0TM, i.e. checking for overlaps, gaps, collar positions and erroneous
surveys.
Site visits • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person • A site visit was undertaken by the Competent Person in January 2023.
and the outcome of those visits.
• No major issues were observed which could have had a material impact.
• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case.
• Geological interpretation was done based on drill hole sections.
Geological • Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological
interpretation of the mineral deposit. • Mineralisation is found to occur predominantly in most of the
interpretation intermediate rock types also crossing lithological boundaries.
• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.
• Mineralisation generally does not extend into the granitic and gneiss
• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource host rocks and the contact is usually sharp.
estimation. The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral
Resource estimation. • Due to the complex nature of these intrusive lithologies and different
phases, ore envelopes based on grade were constructed.
• The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology.
• Grade envelopes were constructed for FMN, FME and FMS using a
minimum sample length weighted cut-off grade of 0.5% Cu.
• The intermediate mineralised rocks are structurally controlled and
pinching and swelling is a common feature, in both strike and dip.
Dimensions • The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as FMN:
length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below
surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. • The mineralisation occurs as three mineralised bodies within a
continuous mafic intrusive.
• The southern and central bodies striking north-south for approximately
280m and 260m respectively, with a shallow dip of approximately 15° to
the north.
• There is a gap of approximately 80m between the northernmost limit of
the southern body and the southernmost limit of the central body.
• There is continuity of mineralisation between the central body and the
northern body which is flat-lying with and has an east-west strike, which
is typical for the O’Okiep Copper District (OCD), of 340m.
• FMN extends from surface to a known maximum depth of 230m.
• An existing decline is developed from the from the south to the southern
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
section of the central body. The decline is in extremely good condition
indicating strong geotechnical conditions.
FMS:
• Mineralisation has an east-west strike length of approximately 580m.
• The ore envelope is undulating but has a general steep dip of 75°
towards the north.
• The intermediate rocks containing the Cu mineralisation has an irregular
continuous configuration.
• The FMS mineralisation is typical for the OCD.
FME:
• Mineralisation at FME consists of two en-echelon “eastern bodies” with
a strike of 560m and an average dip of 55° to the north-northwest.
• The mineralised zones (medium to low grade) are concordant with the
hosting steep structure and comprise of at least two to three, stacked
lenticular bodies.
• Higher grade (>5% Cu) “lenses” occur within these larger bodies and are
considered an important component.
• The strike lengths of these bodies range between 30m to 100m.
• All mineralised bodies occur at sub surface, extending from 50m to 330m
below surface.
• A separate lower grade “western body” has a strike of 320m and a dip
of 65° to the north-northwest. The FME western body extends from 100m
below surface to 400m.
Estimation and • The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) • Mineralised zones for all three deposits (FMN, FME & FMS) were
modelling techniques applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade delineated by creating interpreted strings along successive vertical
values, domaining, interpolation parameters, and maximum sections using a 0.5% Cu cut-off grade.
distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted
estimation method was chosen include a description of computer • Mineralisation often occurs as discrete mineralised lenses within a larger
software and parameters used. mafic body. Generally, individual lenses were grouped together to allow
for correlation, interpretation and modelling of mineralisation between
• The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine successive vertical sections and to create a viable mineralisation
production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate domain for resource estimation.
takes appropriate account of such data.
• For the two FME main bodies, a “waste pillar” comprising lower grade
• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products. lenses predominantly associated with granitic inclusions within the
bodies was modelled for both of the main bodies. These waste pillars
• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of were treated as a separate domain for resource estimation.
economic significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage
characterisation). • No differentiation was made between the oxide and sulphide
mineralisation as generally the oxide component is insignificant within
• In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the Flat Mines deposits.
the average sample spacing and the search employed.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.
FMN:
• Any assumptions about correlation between variables.
• Samples were composited to 2m lengths.
• Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control
the resource estimates. • Cu values were capped to selected thresholds using Parker
methodology. Three samples were capped to 11.79% Cu.
• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.
• A block model was created with dimensions 30m X by 30m Y by 8m Z,
• The process of validation, the checking process used, the with no rotation. Sub-cell size was 1m by 1m by 1m.
comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of
reconciliation data if available.
• Following a spatial analysis, the composite data were used to estimate
the block grades using ordinary kriging (OK).
• In order to reduce the impact of single drillholes, the semi-major search
range was reduced from 17m (variogram range) to 8m, with a maximum
of four samples per drillhole in four quadrants. Neighbourhood analysis
resulted in an optimum search neighbourhood of 45m x 25m x 8m for
local block estimation.
• 72% of blocks (94% of the volume) were estimated by the first-pass.
Blocks that were not estimated by the first-pass ordinary kriging were
estimated using the first-pass estimates as input to a moving average
with the search radii doubled.
FME:
• Samples were composited to 2m lengths.
• Cu values were capped to selected thresholds using Parker
methodology. For the eastern bodies, six samples were capped to
11.62% Cu, while for the western body one sample was capped to 2.16%
Cu.
• A block model was created with dimensions 30m X by 8m Y by 30m Z.
The block model was first rotated by -20° around the Z axis and then by
-38° around the X axis. Sub-cell size was 1m by 1m by 1m.
• Following a spatial analysis, the composite data were used to estimate
the block grades using ordinary kriging (OK) for the eastern bodies. For
the western body where there is a lower sample density and no clear
spatial relationship between samples.
• For the eastern bodies, neighbourhood analysis resulted in an optimum
search neighbourhood of 100m x 5m for local block estimation,
corresponding to the variogram range. The second-pass estimates were
calculated from the pass 1 OK estimates using a moving average
technique with the search radii doubled. 93% of blocks were estimated
by the first-pass, with the remaining blocks estimated by the second-
pass. For the waste pillars the length weighted average grade was
applied.
• For the western body where there is a lower sample density and no clear
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
spatial relationship between samples. Local block estimation using OK
was not feasible and an inverse distance weighting (to a power of two)
(IDW²) approach was utilised instead. The FME Cu% ranges of 100m x
100m x 5.8m were applied. The IDW² estimate resulted in 60% of blocks
being estimated in the first-pass. The second-pass was populated using
a moving average with the first-pass estimates as the input data.
FMS:
• Samples were composited to 1.5m lengths.
• Cu values were assessed for capping using Parker methodology. No
capping for Cu was necessary.
• A block model was created with dimensions 30m X by 6m Y by 30m Z,
with a rotation of -10° around the X axis. Sub-cell size was 1m by 1m by
1m.
• Following a spatial analysis, the composite data were used to estimate
the block grades using ordinary kriging (OK).
• Neighbourhood analysis resulted in an optimum search neighbourhood
of 70m x 70 x 5.5m (corresponding to the variogram range) for local
block estimation. The second-pass estimates were calculated from the
pass 1 OK estimates using a moving average technique with the search
radii increased. 54% of blocks were estimated by the first-pass, with the
remaining blocks estimated by the subsequent passes.
Moisture • Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural • No moisture content was calculated, and the core was naturally dried
moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. when logged and sampled. The estimated tonnages are therefore
based on a natural basis.
Cut-off parameters • The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters • A cut-off of 0.7% Cu was used for the Mineral Resource Statement that
applied. corresponds with reasonable prospects of economic extraction using
today’s economics. This is based on the break-even grade resulting from
the financial model used for the 2021 Scoping Study.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Mining factors or • Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum • All tonnages reported are dry.
assumptions mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining
dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining • FMN is the only deposit with existing mining infra-structure, i.e. a 100m
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider deep decline, ore drives and mined stopes.
potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding
mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources • Mining is planned to consist of historically proven access declines, drill
may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be drives and ore access and draw points.
reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions
made. • The development method is considered to be based on drill-and-blast
executed with trackless mobile equipment.
• The stoping method to be used is considered to be Vertical Crater
Retreat or long-hole stoping, both methods historically successfully
implemented.
Metallurgical factors • The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical SAFTA:
or assumptions amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of
determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction • Although the mineralogy is relatively consistent throughout the licence
to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions area, only samples from FMN were available for metallurgical test work
regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made by SAFTA.
when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous.
Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of • A laboratory scale locked cycle test was conducted by Maelgwyn
the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made. Metallurgical Laboratory.
• Samples were ground to 80% passing 75 microns in order to generate a
grade versus recovery grade.
• A recovery of 96% was achieved with a concentrate grade of over 21%
Cu.
• Tailings grade was 0.15% Cu.
• Calculations indicate that over the life of mine concentrates with a
grade in excess of 25% Cu with a Cu recovery between 84 to 88% are
achievable.
ORION:
• Ore sorting testwork was carried out using RADOS technology on SAFTA
twin hole core from FMN and FMS.
• Work is ongoing but results showed significant benefits to XRF sorting of
the ore.
Environmental factors • Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue • The mining site (deposits) is located within a relatively non-ecologically
or assumptions disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of sensitive location.
determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction
to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and • A number of potential sites were investigated for waste rock and tailings
processing operation. While at this stage the determination of as part of the minimisation of the operational footprint.
potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields
project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early • Mining operations will be underground limiting rehabilitation and
consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be decommissioning.
reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this
• Already spoilt areas will be used for siting of new infra-structure.
• Existing access roads will be used during the operations.
• Finer material will be pumped to the Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) to be
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
should be reported with an explanation of the environmental established on existing old evaporation pans close by.
assumptions made.
Bulk density • Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the • Bulk density (B.D.) data is available for both historical and twinning drill
assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, core.
the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and
representativeness of the samples. • The B.D. data was acquired using the Archimedes method by weighing
drill core in air and water, a practical method considered appropriate
• The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by for this competent rock types.
methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity,
etc), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones • For FMN there was a good spread of density measurements through the
within the deposit. deposit with a total of 549 data points. For FMS there are 79 density
measurements, but these are restricted to the shallower holes in the
• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation deposit. For FME eastern bodies there are no recorded density
process of the different materials. measurements with 43 measurements in the FME western body.
FME:
• With no B.D. measurements in the main eastern bodies, density values
were assigned to logged lithologies based on density statistics from FMN
where host lithologies are similar.
• No capping was applied to the B.D. values assumed for FME main or
western bodies.
• For eastern bodies block density was calculated using IDW² technique
(using the density values assumed from logged lithology).
• The orientation and range of the search neighbourhood was defined by
the Cu % models, i.e. a search range of 100m x 100m x 5.8m orientated
in the plane of the orebody as defined by the experimental variography
for the FME Cu % analysis. A second-pass was done from using first-pass
block estimates and a moving average with the search radii doubled.
• For the western body, the same search neighbourhood was used for
IDW² as for the eastern bodies. A second-pass was done from using first-
pass block estimates and a moving average with the search radii
doubled.
FMN:
• For FMN density outliers, higher values were capped to 3.17t/m3, while
lower values were capped up to 2.53 t/m3.
• For FMN, OK was applied with a search neighbourhood of 45m x 23m x
11m. The first-pass resulted in 53% of the blocks estimated. A second-pass
using first-pass estimates as input data using moving average with the
search radii doubled populated the remainder of the blocks.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
FMS:
• B.D. measurements are restricted to the upper part of the body. No
capping was applied to density values for FMS.
• Due to insufficient data IDW² was used using FMS Cu% variogram ranges
in the plane of mineralisation. The first-pass estimated only 10% of the
parent blocks. The first-pass estimates were used as input to a moving
average to inform the remainder of the blocks.
Classification • The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying • Resource classification incorporated the confidence in the quality of the
confidence categories. drill hole data, data distribution, geological and grade continuity and
consideration of reasonable expectation for eventual economic
• Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors, extraction.
i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of
input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, • The resources are classified as Measured, Indicated and Inferred.
quality, quantity and distribution of the data. Cognisance was taken of the potential uncertainties related to
mineralised envelope delineation and therefore the associated volume
• Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person(s)’ estimation, as well as that this resource estimation is based on historical
view of the deposit. data.
• The geological models are considered by the Competent Person to be
defined to an acceptable level.
• It is considered by the Competent Person that there is sufficiently
accurate data to produce local block estimates using OK in all areas
apart from FME western body where IDW² estimation was employed. For
FME western body and other areas where there is a limited number of
samples, resources are defined as Inferred.
• Although there is a moderate level of uncertainty associated with the
estimation of densities at FME and FMS, the common lithologies
associated with the mineralisation have a relatively narrow range of
density values.
• In most parts of the deposits there are sufficient data for reasonably
accurate local block estimates of grade (FMN 72%; FME 93%; FMS 54%
of blocks populated by first-pass kriging). The kriging performance
parameters, e.g. slope of regression, together with an assessment of the
areas of blocks that were populated by first-pass kriging, were utilised to
make a distinction between the Measured, Indicated and Inferred levels
of confidence.
• Twin and some infill drilling will be required to increase the confidence
and upgrade the Inferred Resources. The results conform to the view of
the Competent Person.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. • The Mineral Resource estimate has been internally audited by Orion.
No external audit has been carried out to date.
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
Discussion of relative • Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and • The geological and mineralisation model, geological and grade
accuracy/confidence confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an continuity has been demonstrated to an acceptable confidence level
approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent in order to support the mineral categories classification.
Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical
procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within • Various statistical and geostatistical methods were applied to quantify
stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed relative accuracy of the resource estimation.
appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect
the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. • Final estimates for all variables in three deposits were validated by
comparing the mean composite grades to the mean estimate grades.
• The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local The data for Cu with the first-pass and final estimates are within 5% of the
estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be composites mean.
relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation
should include assumptions made and the procedures used. • Composite and estimated final grade and density distributions were
compared to ensure that the block estimates represent the original data
• These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the distribution. These were found to be reasonably compatible.
estimate should be compared with production data, where
available. • Swathe Trend plots were created in the Y, X and Z directions and all the
estimates followed the trend of the composite data.
• All estimates were studied graphically and compared to the composite
data in three-dimensional space and they compared reasonably well,
given the high variability of the sample data.
• The only deposit with historical production is FMN. Full detailed
production information is not available but partial records show that
approximately 84,000 tonnes was mined at a grade of 1.5% Cu between
October 1995 and June 1998. Additional mining took place in the early
2000’s and survey plans of old stopes in conjunction with the block
model indicate that approximately 180,000 tonnes at 1.4% Cu has been
mined in total from FMN.
Date: 28-08-2023 02:03:00
Produced by the JSE SENS Department. The SENS service is an information dissemination service administered by the JSE Limited ('JSE').
The JSE does not, whether expressly, tacitly or implicitly, represent, warrant or in any way guarantee the truth, accuracy or completeness of
the information published on SENS. The JSE, their officers, employees and agents accept no liability for (or in respect of) any direct,
indirect, incidental or consequential loss or damage of any kind or nature, howsoever arising, from the use of SENS or the use of, or reliance on,
information disseminated through SENS.
Sharenet Sites 
