Wrap Text
Orion further expands Mineral Resources at the Okiep Copper Project, Flat Mines Area
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 further expands Mineral Resources at the Okiep Copper Project, Flat Mines Area
Resource estimates completed for three additional near surface deposits, increasing the total Mineral Resource at
the OCC to 11.5Mt at 1.4% Cu
- Due diligence work at the Okiep Copper Project (OCP) has defined Inferred Mineral Resource estimates
for a further three deposits in the Flat Mines area, all of which represent potential open pit mining
opportunities.
- The three additional Resource areas are at Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep
Kloof Mine.
- Mineral Resources across the three deposits total 2.5Mt at 1.4% Cu1, which, in addition to the previously
announced Resource of 9Mt at 1.4% Cu (refer ASX/JSE release 10 February 2021), brings the total Mineral
Resources within the Flat Mines Area of the OCP to 11.5Mt at 1.4% Cu.
- The additional Mineral Resources are based on exploration and drilling data contained within the
extensive OCC exploration database secured by Orion last month (refer ASX/JSE release 15 February
2021), confirming the outstanding value of this data acquisition.
- Other exploration and mining drill targets and historical mines 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 on the results:
“The delineation of additional Mineral Resources within the Okiep Copper Project (OCP) is a very positive result
for Orion which provides further evidence of the exceptional value we’ve been able to unlock through the
recent access and option agreement to acquire of the O’Okiep Copper Company (OCC) archives.
The three latest deposits bring our total Mineral Resource within the OCP to 11.5 million tonnes grading 1.4 per
cent copper, which is a remarkable achievement given we only signed the option agreement over the OCP
and commenced due diligence in early February.
“We have a large number of additional targets and historical mines currently being modelled, which we believe
offer strong potential to further expand the OCP Resource base.”
1Mineral Resource reported in ASX release of 10 February 2021: “Orion reports maiden JORC Mineral Resource for the Okiep Copper Prospect,
Flat Mines” available to the public on www.orionminerals.com.au/investors/market-news. Competent Person Mineral Resource: Dr Dion
Brandt. Orion confirms it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included above. The company
confirms that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the original release continue to apply and
have not materially changed. Orion confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not
been materially modified.
Orion Minerals Limited (ASX/JSE: ORN) (Orion or Company) is pleased to report Mineral Resource estimates for
three additional, near surface deposits that form part of the Okiep Copper Project (OCP), where Orion is currently
undertaking due diligence work associated with the acquisition and option agreement announced on 2
February 2021.
The Inferred Mineral Resources, as stated in Table 1 below, have been estimated for the Flat Mine (Nababeep)
(FM, figures 2 and 3), Jan Coetzee Mine (JCM, figures 4 and 5) and Nababeep Kloof Mine (NKM, figures 6 and 7)
deposits, and total 2.5 million tonnes grading 1.4% copper for 35,000 tonnes of contained copper.
Together with the previously reported Mineral Resources for the Flat Mine North, Flat Mine East and Flat Mine
South deposits (refer ASX / JSE release 10 February 2021), these latest Resource estimates increase the total
Mineral Resource at the OCP to 11.5 million tonnes grading 1.4% copper for 159,000 tonnes of contained copper.
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.
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
Total* - - - - - - 2,500,000 1.4 35,000
*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.
Table 1: Inferred Mineral Resource Statement for the Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep Kloof Mine.
Figure 1: SAFTA/Orion prospecting and mining rights showing previously-reported (blue) and additional (orange) Mineral Resources.
Measured Indicated Inferred
Mine / Prospect
Mt % Cu t Cu Mt % Cu t Cu Mt % Cu t Cu
Flat Mine (Nababeep) - - - - - - 1.0 1.4 15,000
Jan Coetzee Mine - - - - - - 1.0 1.4 14,000
Nababeep Kloof Mine - - - - - - 0.5 1.2 6,000
Flat Mine East1 3.166 1.43 45,000 0.800 1.11 8,900 - - -
Flat Mine North1 0.339 1.27 4,300 0.970 1.50 14,500 - - -
Flat Mine South1 - - - 3.321 1.41 45,600 0.4 0.8 3,000
Total 3.505 1.41 49,300 5.001 1.38 69,000 3.0 1.3 38,000
Table 2: Total Mineral Resource Statement for the Flat Mines Area of the OCP (0.7% Cu cut-off).
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 105.6Mt at 1.71%
Cu since the 1900’s2.
Copper deposits are hosted by easterly-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 intermediate and basic mineralised rocks are structurally controlled with pinching and swelling a common
feature, in both strike and dip.
A strong correlation is recognised between high-grade massive ore and at least three favourable lithological
target horizons, with high grade blows forming where the dykes cut these three specific lithologies:
• Springbok Quartzite and Schist;
• Mixed Zone or Wolfram Schist; and
• Ratelpoort Quartzite and Schist.
The best analogue to the Okiep copper district is probably the copper district of the Curaçá River Valley in Brazil,
which hosts quoted deposits of 180Mt of copper sulphide grading 1% copper, including 5 million tons of copper
oxide material at a grade of 0.6% Cu3. Production came from both underground and surface workings.
The Flat Mine (Nababeep) mineralisation occurs as one relatively continuous east-west striking body. The known
mineralised portion is at least 200m long, strikes east – west and dips steeply towards the north (figures 2 and 3).
The mineralised body occurs at surface to shallow sub-surface and was historically mined down dip.
Mineralisation at Jan Coetzee Mine also has a general east-west strike and a length of approximately 230m, it
occurs as numerous steep northerly dipping lenses (dyke slivers), figure 4. An apparent gap exists between the
“main” mineralisation body and another body located to the west.
The Nababeep Kloof Mine mineralised intermediate-basic rocks generally strike east-west and are outcropping.
It has no discernible dip and has a general “rod” or lens geometry, figure 7. The mineralised body strikes at least
120m – 150m.
2Lombaard 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.
3Hasui 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.
Drilling Techniques
A total of 33 surface drill-holes totalling 5,462m of drilling at Flat Mine (Nababeep), 33 surface holes (3,790m) at
Jan Coetzee Mine and 44 surface holes (2,763m) and 26 underground holes (1,072m) at Nababeep Kloof Mine
were captured in the drilling database and were used to model the Mineral Resources (Figure 1, Table 3). All
holes were drilled using diamond drilling.
All historical collars were surveyed using a total station theodolite by a qualified surveyor. Down hole surveys of
the historical holes were done using and Eastman survey tool.
Historical drilling was primarily carried out by OCC when a Newmont subsidiary and later as a Gold Fields of South
Africa (Pty) Ltd (GFSA) subsidiary, all of which were reputable mining companies operating in South Africa during
the 1980’s.
Historical AX or BQ (OCC) size diamond drill core was used for analysis of grades. Where AX size core was drilled,
whole core was sampled. In the case of BQ core, core was split and the full length of half-core was submitted
for assay. BQ size was later used by GFSA.
No twin drilling was done on the Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep Kloof Mine deposits,
however recent twin drilling was carried out by current owners at Flat Mine North and South (refer ASX release 10
February 2021). A good correlation between the historical and recent twin holes was achieved
Sampling and Sub-Sampling Techniques
Historical diamond AX or BQ whole core was used for analysis of grades.
For diamond drilling carried out by OCC between 1953 and 1978, there is limited information available on
sampling techniques for core. It is considered that there would be procedures in place to the industry best
practice standard at that time.
Samples by OCC and GFSA were taken over two meter intervals adjusted to accommodate geological
contacts. OCC submitted whole core to the lab (AX core size), except for a 10cm piece of core left as a
reference. GFSA cut the BQ core at the core-yard and half core samples were taken. The entire sample length
was cut and sampled.
Exploration is considered to have been carried out under the supervision of OCC. In the Competent Person's
opinion, the sampling and sub-sampling was accurate, precise and fit for the purpose of resource estimation.
The OCC successfully operated copper mines in the district for more than 50 years and has a proven record of
converting resources to reserves.
Sample Analysis Method
Historical samples were prepared and analysed at the OCC on-mine laboratory in Nababeep. No official records
exist for laboratory procedures for the OCC laboratory. Core samples were reportedly crushed, split and assayed
for copper content by atomic absorption techniques 4. No certified reference material, blanks and duplicates
were inserted, however the OCC laboratory inserted in-house standard reference material with each batch. In
the Competent Person’s opinion Sampling analysis was according to industry’s best practises and is acceptable
for inferred resource estimation.
Estimation Methodology
Mineralised zones (“grade shells” for all three deposits (Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep
Kloof Mine) were delineated by using a 0.5% Cu cut-off grade shell.
Samples were composited to 1m; no capping was applied to all three deposits.
Interpolation of the composite data was used to calculate block Cu grades using omni-directional variograms
(50m range) and inverse distance squared estimation.
4Gadd-Claxton D.L. The Economic Geology of the Okiep Copper Deposits, Namaqualand, South Africa. M.Sc. (Mineral Exploration)
dissertation, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, 1981.
Block model cells of 5m x 5m x 2.5m were used for all three estimations. Sub-celling was applied.
Historical relative densities (SG t/m3) were determined using the Archimedes method by weighing the core in air
and water respectively. Average SG’s were applied and were not estimated.
No differentiation was made between the oxide and sulphide mineralisation, generally the oxide component is
insignificant within the OCP.
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
Confidence in the geological and mineralisation models and geological continuity allowed the incorporation
and use of the entire drilling database. Confidence is further based on historical underground plans, cross
sections, long sections, and production records.
These shallow sulphide resources are classified as Inferred. This reflects potential uncertainties relating to
mineralised envelope delineation (and therefore the associated volume estimation), as well as that most of this
resource estimation is based on historical data.
Twin and some infill drilling will be required to increase the confidence and upgrade the Inferred Resources.
The Resource classification has been carried out in accordance with the JORC Code (2012). The grade and
densities are estimated with sufficient confidence to allow the application of Modifying Factors in sufficient detail
to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence has
been derived from adequately detailed and reliable exploration and sampling gathered through appropriate
techniques, and is sufficient to assume geological and grade continuity between data points.
In the Competent Person's view, it is a realistic inventory of the mineralisation which, after preliminary evaluation
of technical, economic and development conditions, might, in whole or in part, become economically
extractable. In the Competent Person's opinion, it is more likely than not that there are reasonable prospects for
eventual economic extraction of the Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep Kloof deposits.
Cut-off Grades
Mineralised zones (“grade shells” for all three deposits (Flat Mine (Nababeep), Jan Coetzee Mine and Nababeep
Kloof Mine) were delineated by using a 0.5% Cu lower cut-off grade shell. Historical modelling and resource
delineation has shown that a geological cut-off grade of 0.5% Cu yields representative grade shells for this type
of mineralisation.
Mineralisation delineation is based on available geological and mining data. Strikes and dips derived from
geological plans and sections are considered and applied accordingly.
Resources are reported at a series of cut-off grades, i.e. 0.5%, 0.7%, 1.0% and 2.0%, similarly these cut-offs where
historically found to be representative in modelling and reporting. For the purpose of this document, resources
are reported at 0.7% Cu cut-off.
Mining, Metallurgical Methods and Modifying Factors
Mining of these three resources is considered of interest for of open pit operations. No metallurgical test work
results are available.
Historical mined areas (stopes) shown on historical mine survey plans were excluded from the resource. Reported
tonnes mined:
• Flat Mine (Nababeep) – 0.15Mt @ 2.72% Cu ~ 3,841 t Cu;
• Jan Coetzee Mine – 1.9Mt @ 1.05% Cu ~ 19,888 t Cu; and
• Nababeep Kloof Mine – 0.2Mt @ 1.39% Cu ~ 2,507 t Cu.
Apart from Jan Coetzee Mine where mining concentrated on the northern limb/portion, it is evident that historical
underground mining primarily targeted the high grades.
No historical metallurgical test results are available; however, since 1946, OCC mined and treated 105.6Mt from
27 different mines all with similar and amenable metallurgy. No metallurgical test work has been done by Orion.
Future Activities
Some twin and infill drilling will be required to increase the confidence and upgrade the Inferred Resources. A
scoping study assessment is currently underway which will determine potential viability for mining of the OCP
Resources.
For and on behalf of the Board.
Errol Smart
Managing Director and CEO
29 March 2021
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@merchantec.co.za
Competent Persons Statement
The information in this report that relates to Orion’s Exploration Results and Mineral Resource at the Okiep Copper Project
complies with the 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves (JORC Code) and has been compiled and assessed under the supervision of Dr Deon Vermaakt. Dr Vermaakt (Pri.
Sci. Nat.) is registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (Registration No. 400020/00), a ROPO
for JORC purposes. Dr Vermaakt 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. Dr Vermaakt consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the
form and context in which it appears.
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 (Nababeep) plan view (Red mineralised bodies at 0.5% Cu) Light blue wireframes represent known underground workings.
Figure 3: Flat Mine (Nababeep) longitudinal block model (looking West) Light blue wireframes represent underground mined areas.
¯
Figure 4: Jan Coetzee Mine plan view (Red wireframes of mineralised bodies above 0.5% Cu cut-off).
Figure 5: Jan Coetzee Mine 3D cross section (looking west).
Figure 6: Nababeep Kloof Mine block model, plan view.
Figure 7: Nababeep Kloof Mine 3D cross section block model (looking east).
12
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, • Prior to 1984 by O’Okiep Copper Company (OCC).
or handheld XRF instruments, etc.). These examples should not be • 1984 – 1999 by Goldfields of South Africa (GFSA).
taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
• Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity • and in 2018 by South Africa Tantalum Mining (SAFTA).
and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems OCC and GFSA:
used. • For diamond drilling carried out by OCC between 1953 and 1978,
• Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the there is limited information available on sampling techniques for
Public Report. core. With exploration and resource management being carried out
• In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be under the supervision of OCC, it is considered by the Competent
relatively simple (e.g. ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 Person that there would be procedures in place to the industry best
m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge practice standard at that time. This is based on discussions with
for fire assay’). In other cases more explanation may be required, such personnel employed by OCC.
as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) • The exploration and resource management were under the
may warrant disclosure of detailed information. 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 over 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 lab (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 submitted over the entire sample interval.
• For both companies, samples were numbered and bagged at the
core yard before being submitted to the laboratory.
• No formal QA/QC samples were inserted at the time by the
geologists on the exploration site. OCC laboratory developed their
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.
Drilling techniques • Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air OCC:
blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple • All intersections were by core drilling.
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other • AX-size core was drilled.
type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc.). • Core orientation was not done.
GFSA:
• All intersections were by core drilling.
• BQ core size was drilled.
• No core orientation was carried out.
Drill sample recovery • Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries OCC:
and results assessed. • All mineralised intersections were done with core drilling.
• Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure • Core stick-ups reflecting the depth of the drill hole are recorded at
representative nature of the samples. 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
loss/gain of fine/coarse material. box 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 envisaged
through the mineralisation.
Logging • Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and OCC and GFSA:
geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate • All relevant intersections for surface holes have been logged by
Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. qualified geologists and all of this information is available.
• Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or • No geotechnical information is available for the historic drill holes.
costean, channel, etc.) photography.
• 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 estimate of sulphide mineralogy.
• 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.
Sub-sampling • If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core OCC:
techniques and taken. • All sample data is available.
sample preparation • If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc. and • All drill core were used.
whether sampled wet or dry.
• For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the • The entire sample length was submitted to the laboratory except for
sample preparation technique. a 10cm piece of core left 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 sampling method was appropriate and representative of the
• Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in- sample interval.
situ material collected, including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling. • No certified reference materials, blanks and duplicates were
• Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material inserted, however the OCC Laboratory inserted in house standard
being sampled. reference material with each batch.
GFSA:
• BQ core was cut a core yard and half core taken as sample.
• With core samples, the entire sample length is cut and sampled.
• No certified reference materials, blanks and duplicates were
inserted, however reportedly the OCC Laboratory inserted in house
standard reference material with each batch.
Quality of assay data • The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and OCC and GFSA:
and laboratory tests laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered • No records exist for laboratory procedures for the OCC Laboratory.
partial or total. Core samples were reported to be crushed, split and assayed for
• For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc., copper content by atomic absorption techniques4.
the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument • No geophysical tools, spectrometers or handheld XRF instruments
make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their were used.
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 • The OCC successfully operated copper mines in the district for more
levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been than 50 years and has a proven record of converting resources to
established. reserves.
Verification of • The verification of significant intersections by either independent or OCC and GFSA:
sampling and alternative company personnel. • No records available on the verification of data.
assaying • 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.
Location of data • Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and OCC and GFSA:
points down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used • Drill hole collars were surveyed by qualified surveyors and
in Mineral Resource estimation. documented in a Survey Logbook.
• Specification of the grid system used. • All surface and underground drill hole collars were surveyed by
• Quality and adequacy of topographic control. qualified surveyors using a theodolite.
• The historic mine survey data is in the old national LO 17 Cape1880
system coordinate system.
• Down-hole surveys were carried out using an Eastman survey
instrument and documented and filed. Plans and sections were
meticulously plotted and signed off by a certified surveyor.
Data spacing and • Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. OCC and GFSA:
distribution • Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the • Original exploration holes were drilled aiming to achieve a 60m by
degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral 30m spacing, considered appropriate for Mineral Resource
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications estimation of this type of mineralisation.
applied.
• Whether sample compositing has been applied.
Orientation of data in • Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of OCC and GFSA:
relation to geological possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering • Historical drilling is generally oriented perpendicular, or at a
structure the deposit type. maximum achievable angle, to the attitude of the mineralisation.
• If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation • As a result, most holes intersect the mineralisation at an acceptable
of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a angle.
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. • No sampling bias is anticipated as a result of drill hole orientations.
Sample security • The measures taken to ensure sample security. OCC and GFSA:
• No details of sample security available. However, during the mining
operations, the site was fenced and gated with security personnel
employed as part of the staff.
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. OCC and GFSA:
• No audits and/or review records or documentation are available.
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 OCC and GFSA:
land tenure status agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, • OCC and GFSA held vast areas under prospecting and mining rights,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, most of these have been relinquished.
wilderness or national park and environmental settings. SAFTA/ORION:
• 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 Flat Mines area comprises 8,311.9ha and is covered by two
prospecting rights (licences), figure 1.
• NC11893PR expired in October 2020 and NC12014PR expired in
January 2021. Renewal applications have been submitted for both
licences, confirmed from Department of Mineral Resources and
Energy correspondence.
• The prospecting rights were issued for copper and tungsten ore only.
• An application under Section 102 was made to include additional
metals lead, silver, zinc, bismuth, cadmium, cobalt, magnetic
minerals, gold and uranium.
• An application for a mining right (NC10150MR) has been submitted
covering a smaller portion (approximately 1,210 ha) of expired right
NC11896PR and FM.
• Only one renewal is allowed and is now covered by prospecting
right application NC12755 submitted 5 February 2021.
Exploration done by • Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. OCC 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. Okiep Copper Project (OCP):
• 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 Structures” 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 OCP 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 OCC 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: ORION database, and due to the large number of intersections
o easting and northing of the drill hole collar made it is in the Competent Person view that it should not be
o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in included in this table.
metres) of the drill hole collar • Historically at least 102 holes were drilled totalling 42,834m on the
o dip and azimuth of the hole three deposits, most are AQ
o down hole length and interception depth
o hole length. • Numerous underground drill holes were drilled, these still have to be
• If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the digitally captured, imported into the database and modelling.
information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the • This resource estimate was based on only a portion of the drill hole
understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly database, namely: FM (33 holes, 5,462m), JCM (33 holes, 3,790m)
explain why this is the case. and NKM (70 holes, 3,835m).
• All historical drill hole collars were surveyed.
• Down-hole surveys are available for the majority of the historical
GFSA.
Data aggregation • In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, OCC and GFSA:
methods maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high • Individual intersections were weighted by sample width.
grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. • Mineralised sample lengths were erratically standardised at 1.0, 1.5
• Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade and 2.0 metres.
results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for
such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of • No truncations were applied.
such aggregations should be shown in detail.
• The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values
should be clearly stated.
Relationship between • These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of OCC and GFSA:
mineralisation widths Exploration Results. • Historical drilling is generally oriented perpendicular, or at a
and intercept lengths • If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle maximum achievable angle to, the attitude of the mineralisation.
is known, its nature should be reported. • Generally, drill hole inclinations ranged between -30° to 90°.
• 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’).
Diagrams • Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of • Numerous plans and cross-sections are available and were utilised
intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being during the geological and mineralization modelling.
reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill • All historical data is available as hard copies and is currently being
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. digitised and incorporated into a GIS system.
Balanced reporting • Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not ORION:
practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades • This resource estimation is based on all available historical data.
and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of
Exploration Results.
Other substantive • Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported ORION:
exploration data including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical • Detailed surface maps and drill sections were extensively consulted
survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and and utilised in the understanding of geology and mineralisation.
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.
• No metallurgical test work was done by Orion, but OCC mined and
treated 105.6Mt from 27 different mines all with similar and amenable
metallurgy
Further work 1. The nature and scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral ORION:
extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). • More twinning of historical drill holes is needed in order to improve
2. Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, confidence in the historical data.
including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, • Deeper mineralisation as well as en echelon type mineralised lenses
provided this information is not commercially sensitive. are potentially present and should be further investigated.
FM:
• Twin drilling in order to verify historical drill holes geology and grades.
• In-fill resource delineation drilling to upgrade the resource to at least
“Indicated”.
• Target drilling to follow-up on the potential strike and dip extension
towards the east and west.
JCM:
• Twin drilling in order to verify historical drill holes geology and grades.
• In-fill resource delineation drilling to upgrade the resource to at least
“Indicated”.
• Target drilling to follow-up on the potential strike extension towards
the east.
NKM:
• Twin drilling in order to verify historical drill holes geology and grades
• In-fill resource delineation drilling to upgrade the resource to at least
“Indicated”.
Table 3: Drill hole information used in resource estimations for all prospects.
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM049 75424.77 -3270161.67 755.38 504.749 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM050 75422.55 -3270230.47 752.65 154.229 -65 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM051 75519.36 -3270210.61 752.97 169.774 -75 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM052 75478.14 -3270188.05 754.42 200.254 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM053 75519.33 -3270210.40 752.97 184.709 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM054 75519.27 -3270210.16 752.92 153.619 -60 338 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM055 75384.03 -3270174.21 753.60 82.601 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM056 75522.85 -3270225.39 750.98 91.44 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM057 75384.74 -3270174.54 753.57 119.177 -60 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM058 75478.65 -3270228.51 752.33 131.064 -70 360 OCC Surface Diamond
20
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM059 75448.67 -3270220.57 753.14 148.742 -70 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM060 75434.58 -3270216.64 752.88 113.995 -70 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM061 75464.09 -3270224.57 752.52 119.786 -70 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM062 75492.68 -3270232.75 751.51 150.571 -70 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM063 75478.73 -3270228.31 752.34 103.327 -55 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM064 75448.62 -3270220.30 753.13 94.183 -60 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM065 75466.78 -3270160.79 756.11 153.619 -70 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM066 75522.89 -3270225.57 750.95 73.152 -75 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM067 75524.08 -3270224.86 751.04 129.54 -75 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM068 75390.30 -3270204.81 753.25 57.607 -75 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM069 75393.06 -3270205.77 753.21 131.978 -80 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM070 75505.15 -3270213.79 752.73 152.4 -75 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM071 75561.57 -3270227.13 750.76 102.718 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM072 75525.32 -3270183.84 754.33 123.139 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM129 75465.33 -3270270.29 750.12 211.836 -65 345 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM130 75503.13 -3270165.41 755.49 108.814 -70 162 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM136 75428.10 -3270216.09 753.06 550.164 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM157 75565.11 -3270145.29 754.91 201.2 -50 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM158 75565.02 -3270144.62 754.99 106 -65 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM159 75565.01 -3270085.43 757.62 163 -50 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM160 75570.07 -3270042.33 759.36 252 -45 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM161 75570.06 -3270041.72 759.46 278.8 -52 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Flat Mine (Nababeep) FM162 75595.19 -3270122.90 755.16 144 -50 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM004 74034.65 -3267518.52 761.38 224.333 -30 44 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM059 74125.63 -3267511.27 793.42 182.27 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM060 74127.15 -3267547.05 778.30 249.022 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM061 74129.38 -3267598.93 763.09 298.399 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM119 74187.65 -3267506.12 807.81 146.304 -35 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM120 74217.78 -3267499.06 817.17 151.79 -35 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM121 74187.62 -3267469.37 828.47 121.92 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM122 74218.12 -3267471.03 832.60 103.937 -35 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM123 74187.57 -3267470.17 828.47 81.686 -60 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM124 74217.84 -3267472.07 832.58 50.902 -60 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM125 74187.75 -3267458.75 833.92 53.95 -35 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM126 74217.78 -3267498.17 817.17 60.35 -55 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM128 74157.44 -3267510.42 798.81 149.962 -35 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM129 74156.95 -3267488.90 814.83 128.321 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM131 74157.03 -3267470.35 822.59 133.502 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM132 74141.61 -3267475.10 817.16 97.536 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM133 74141.23 -3267488.86 811.31 126.492 -45 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM134 74141.25 -3267488.86 811.31 163.068 -60 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM135 74248.56 -3267450.21 842.41 91.44 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM136 74248.56 -3267450.82 842.40 76.81 -55 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM137 74247.96 -3267438.82 845.23 76.2 -40 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM138 74157.44 -3267510.42 798.82 219.456 -50 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM140 74217.96 -3267395.92 859.16 82.601 -60 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM141 74217.96 -3267395.53 859.16 75.286 -80 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM142 74218.01 -3267418.90 856.21 60.96 -70 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM143 74216.89 -3267381.69 858.00 85.344 -80 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM145 74186.56 -3267384.23 844.82 73.457 -60 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM146 74186.29 -3267383.89 844.82 88.392 -45 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM147 74187.97 -3267360.15 838.44 82.296 -50 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM148 74157.32 -3267402.58 837.97 51.816 -40 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM149 74157.32 -3267402.00 837.97 61.874 -55 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM150 74187.97 -3267359.73 838.44 85.039 -60 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Jan Coetzee Mine JCM151 74187.90 -3267408.35 850.87 54.864 -55 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK01 78480.61 -3276248.53 959.40 76.81 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK05 78512.15 -3276247.61 963.89 78.943 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK07 78540.08 -3276279.95 957.59 99.365 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK08 78541.32 -3276309.70 949.32 60.96 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK09 78570.57 -3276280.70 958.33 59.436 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK10 78510.93 -3276277.72 954.98 104.546 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK11 78594.68 -3276281.89 963.82 96.926 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK12 78569.69 -3276310.91 951.33 44.806 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK13 78511.67 -3276306.97 947.06 65.837 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK14 78477.85 -3276312.12 942.17 66.446 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK15 78483.20 -3276276.67 952.40 97.536 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK17 78450.75 -3276246.77 958.37 84.125 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK18 78448.44 -3276310.04 941.15 50.597 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK19 78449.22 -3276278.17 947.25 69.19 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK25 78601.46 -3276312.38 958.00 55.474 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK27 78628.80 -3276280.72 973.71 64.618 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK34 78594.55 -3276282.54 963.88 48.768 -54 158 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK35 78600.03 -3276259.53 970.57 79.248 -67.5 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK36 78600.16 -3276266.43 968.15 110.033 -60 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK37 78603.62 -3276252.28 973.41 83.82 -75 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK40 78615.53 -3276278.45 971.29 48.768 -59 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK41 78614.59 -3276277.90 971.23 48.768 -71.5 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK42 78616.05 -3276317.73 958.41 66.142 -38 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK43 78617.06 -3276319.29 958.10 18.288 -70 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK44 78615.70 -3276294.65 965.41 35.357 -59.5 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK45 78617.18 -3276295.37 965.64 26.822 -56 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK46 78572.76 -3276247.43 971.82 81.077 -59 184 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK47 78571.30 -3276281.44 958.33 56.388 -75 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK48 78570.68 -3276281.39 958.20 56.693 -65 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK49 78570.73 -3276281.73 958.20 39.014 -50 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK50 78555.26 -3276259.50 964.85 103.632 -48 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK51 78555.26 -3276259.50 964.85 60.35 -59 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK52 78553.26 -3276304.71 949.47 29.87 -82 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK53 78553.21 -3276305.42 949.39 30.785 -55 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK54 78552.43 -3276303.63 949.52 49.682 -40 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK58 78464.60 -3276236.68 962.87 107.29 -85 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK59 78464.02 -3276293.91 946.08 78.334 -46.5 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK61 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 38.405 -35 360 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK62 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 59.741 -60 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK63 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 33.528 -90 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK64 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 53.95 -51.5 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK65 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 76.505 -72.5 0 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK66 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 32.918 -67.5 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NK67 78585.88 -3276296.29 957.98 33.528 -40 180 OCC Surface Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU01 78555.40 -3276278.91 884.40 45.11 65 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU02 78555.40 -3276280.13 884.40 39.014 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU03 78555.40 -3276281.05 884.40 45.72 65 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU04 78464.66 -3276266.18 882.72 20.726 0 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU05 78464.66 -3276266.18 883.72 36.271 35 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU06 78464.66 -3276267.50 881.70 9.144 -60 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU07 78464.66 -3276267.50 884.72 51.816 55 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU08 78464.66 -3276267.50 884.72 29.566 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU09 78464.66 -3276267.50 884.72 37.795 50 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU10 78495.14 -3276276.00 884.72 62.789 50 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU11 78555.40 -3276281.96 884.40 28.042 45 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU12 78495.14 -3276276.00 884.72 46.33 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU13 78495.14 -3276275.00 884.72 64.008 50 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU14 78525.62 -3276276.60 884.72 49.378 70 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU15 78525.62 -3276276.60 884.72 43.891 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU16 78525.62 -3276276.60 884.72 54.559 70 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Mine/Prospect Hole ID Easting Northing RL Hole Length Dip Azimuth Company Type
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU17 78525.62 -3276280.30 884.64 68.275 50 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU18 78495.14 -3276275.00 884.72 45.72 70 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU19 78510.38 -3276270.10 884.72 38.71 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU20 78510.38 -3276270.10 884.72 34.747 60 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU21 78510.38 -3276270.10 884.72 51.816 55 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU22 78449.42 -3276271.52 884.35 43.282 55 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU23 78449.42 -3276272.52 884.35 39.624 90 0 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU24 78510.38 -3276297.64 910.86 23.774 60 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU25 78525.62 -3276299.47 910.86 30.48 50 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Nababeep Kloof Mine NKU26 78540.87 -3276299.47 910.86 31.09 60 180 OCC Underground Diamond
Collars were surveyed by total station theodolite. All drill holes were surveyed with down-hole instruments. Collar coordinates are in LO17 Cape survey system.
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 ORION:
been corrupted by, for example, transcription or • Historical data has been digitally captured from hand-written documents, plans and
keying errors, between its initial collection and its sections.
use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. • All data is presented in excel spread sheet format.
• Data validation procedures used. • Where possible 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, i.e. checking for overlaps, gaps, collar
positions and erroneous surveys.
• All drill hole and spatial data will be imported into an Access database format which
will allow easier and automated checks and verification.
Site visits • Comment on any site visits undertaken by the ORION:
Competent Person and the outcome of those • Numerous site visits were undertaken by the competent person.
visits.
• If no site visits have been undertaken indicate
why this is the case.
Geological • Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) ORION:
interpretation the geological interpretation of the mineral • Geological interpretation was done based on drill hole sections.
deposit. • Mineralisation is found to occur predominantly in most of the intermediate rock types
• Nature of the data used and of any assumptions also crossing lithological boundaries.
made. • Mineralisation generally does not extent into the granitic and gneiss host rocks and the
• The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on contact is usually sharp.
Mineral Resource estimation. The use of geology • Due to the complex nature of these intrusive lithologies and different phases, ore
in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource envelopes based on grade were constructed.
estimation.
• The factors affecting continuity both of grade • Grade envelopes were constructed for FM, JCM and NKM using a minimum sample
and geology. 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 FM:
expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), • The mineralisation occurs as one relatively continuous east-west striking body.
plan width, and depth below surface to the • The known mineralised portion is at least 200m long, strikes east – west and steeply dips
upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.
towards the north, figures 2 and 3.
• The FM resource occurs at surface to sub-surface and was historically mined at depth.
JCM:
• Mineralisation also has a general east-west strike and length of approximately 230m.
• Mineralisation occurs as numerous steeply dipping lenses (dykes), figure 4.
• A gap exists between the “main” modelled mineralisation and a body located to the
west.
NKM:
• The NKM generally strikes east-west, and outcrops on surface.
• It has no discernible dip and has generally a “rod” geometry, figure 7.
• The mineralised body strikes at least 120m – 150m.
Estimation and • The nature and appropriateness of the estimation OCC and GFSA:
modelling techniques technique(s) applied and key assumptions, • No official resource estimates were done prior to 2017.
including treatment of extreme grade values,
• A non-compliant estimate based on available historical drilling was done in 2017/2018
domaining, interpolation parameters, and by OCC.
maximum distance of extrapolation from data
points. If a computer assisted estimation method • FM, JCM & NKM were all modelled and estimated using 5m x 5m x 5m blocks.
was chosen include a description of computer • Inverse Distance Squared was applied.
software and parameters used. • No capping of results was applied.
• The availability of check estimates, previous
estimates and/or mine production records and • OCC Resources reported at 0.50% Cu (FM, JCM).
whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes Prospect Tonnes Mean %Cu
appropriate account of such data. Flat Mine (Nababeep) 1,508,504 1.19
• The assumptions made regarding recovery of by- Jan Coetzee Mine 1,006,217 1.12
products. Nababeep Kloof Mine 1,117,713 0.93
• Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-
grade variables of economic significance (e.g. • Modelling and cut-offs are different to ORION’s but still comparable.
sulfur for acid mine drainage characterisation). ORION:
• In the case of block model interpolation, the • Only Cu was modelled and estimated, no other buy-products or deleterious elements
block size in relation to the average sample (such as sulphur) were estimated.
spacing and the search employed.
• No selective mining units were modelled.
• Any assumptions behind modelling of selective
mining units. • No data cuts were applied.
• Any assumptions about correlation between • Geological knowledge and data from surface plans, geological sections and historical
variables. underground workings were used during grade shell modelling.
• Description of how the geological interpretation Flat Mine (Nababeep):
was used to control the resource estimates.
• Discussion of basis for using or not using grade • Flat Mine (Nababeep) was discretised using blocks of 5m x 5m x 2.5m.
cutting or capping. • Inverse Distance Squared was used to interpolate Cu values into a three-dimensional
• The process of validation, the checking process block model.
used, the comparison of model data to drill hole • A total of 200,772 blocks were estimated.
data, and use of reconciliation data if available.
• Sub-celling was applied with rotation of blocks (004°/85°).
• An omni-directional search ellipsoid was applied with radii 50m.
• No top cut was applied to the 1m composites.
Jan Coetzee Mine:
• A block model was created by discretizing the geological model by 5m x 5m x 2.5m.
• Inverse Distance Squared estimation was applied.
• Sub-celling was applied with no rotation of blocks.
• A total of 613,360 blocks were estimated.
• No top cut was applied to the 1m composites.
Nababeep Kloof Mine:
• The geological model was discretised using 5m x 5m x 2.5m.
• Inverse Distance Squared was selected for final estimation.
• An omni-directional search ellipsoid was applied with radii 50m.
• No sub-celling and no rotation of blocks.
• Sub-celling was applied with no rotation of blocks.
• A total of 205,020 blocks were used.
• No capping was applied.
Moisture • Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry ORION:
basis or with natural moisture, and the method of • No moisture content was calculated, and the core was naturally dried when logged
determination of the moisture content. 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 ORION:
quality parameters applied. • Based on historic experience and allowing better modelling, a grade envelope at a
cut-off of 0.5 %Cu was used.
• The mineral resource reported used a base case of 0.7% Cu.
Mining factors or • Assumptions made regarding possible mining ORION:
assumptions methods, minimum mining dimensions and • All tonnages reported are dry.
internal (or, if applicable, external) mining
• All three prospects (FM, JCM and NKM) were to a certain extent mined underground.
dilution. It is always necessary as part of the
process of determining reasonable prospects for • The proposed mining method will be open pit.
eventual economic extraction to consider • The resource (FM, JCM & NBK) reported was depleted in portions by the historical mined
potential mining methods, but the assumptions areas.
made regarding mining methods and • Generally, the higher grades were mined underground.
parameters when estimating Mineral Resources
may not always be rigorous. Where this is the
case, this should be reported with an explanation
of the basis of the mining assumptions made.
Metallurgical factors • The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding ORION:
or assumptions metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary • No metallurgical test results are available.
as part of the process of determining reasonable
• No metallurgical test work has so far been done.
prospects for eventual economic extraction to
consider potential metallurgical methods, but the
assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment
processes and parameters made when reporting
Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous.
Where this is the case, this should be reported
with an explanation of the basis of the
metallurgical assumptions made.
Environmental factors • Assumptions made regarding possible waste and ORION:
or assumptions process residue disposal options. It is always • The mining site (deposits) is located within a relatively non-ecologically sensitive
necessary as part of the process of determining location.
reasonable prospects for eventual economic
• A number of potential sites were investigated for waste rock and tailings as part of the
extraction to consider the potential minimization of the operational footprint
environmental impacts of the mining and
processing operation. While at this stage the • Mining operations will be open pit.
determination of potential environmental • Already spoilt areas will be used for siting of new infra-structure.
impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, • Existing access roads will be used during the operations.
may not always be well advanced, the status of
early consideration of these potential • Finer material will be pumped to the Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) to be established on
environmental impacts should be reported. existing old evaporation pans close by.
Where these aspects have not been considered
this should be reported with an explanation of
the environmental assumptions made.
Bulk density • Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, ORION:
the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the • Limited Bulk Density (B.D.) data is available for historical drill core.
method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency
of the measurements, the nature, size and • The B.D. data was acquired using the Archimedes method by weighing drill core in air
and water, a practical method considered appropriate for this competent rock types.
representativeness of the samples.
• The bulk density for bulk material must have been • The average B.D.’s used for all three deposits is 2.75 (mineralised intermediate-mafic
measured by methods that adequately account rocks) which seem to be a good representative average of the mineralised rock types
for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture and within the area.
differences between rock and alteration zones
within the deposit.
• Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used
in the evaluation process of the different materials.
Classification • The basis for the classification of the Mineral ORION:
Resources into varying confidence categories. • Resource classification incorporated the confidence in the quality of the drill hole data,
• Whether appropriate account has been taken of data distribution, geological and grade continuity and consideration of reasonable
all relevant factors, i.e. relative confidence in expectation for eventual economic extraction.
tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input
Flat Mine (Nababeep)
data, confidence in continuity of geology and
metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of • Inferred resource reported at base cut-off grade of 0.7% Cu.
the data. • Previously mined mineralisation (ore) was deducted from the mineral resource estimate.
• Whether the result appropriately reflects the
Category Tonnes Mean % Cu
Competent Person(s)’ view of the deposit.
Inferred 1,024,000 1.4
Jan Coetzee Mine
• Inferred resource reported at base cut-off grade of 0.7% Cu.
• Previously mined mineralisation (ore) was deducted from the mineral resource estimate.
Category Tonnes Mean % Cu
Inferred 1,014,000 1.4
Nababeep Kloof Mine
• Inferred resource reported at base cut-off grade of 0.7% Cu.
• Previously mined mineralisation (ore) was deducted from the mineral resource estimate.
Category Tonnes Mean % Cu
Inferred 527,00 1.2
Audits or reviews • The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral ORION:
Resource estimates. • Mineral resource estimate has not yet been externally audited.
Discussion of relative • Where appropriate a statement of the relative ORION:
accuracy/confidence accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral • The geological and mineralisation model, geological and grade continuity has been
Resource estimate using an approach or demonstrated to an acceptable confidence level in order to support the mineral
procedure deemed appropriate by the categories classification.
Competent Person. For example, the application
• Successful historical mining also increases confidence in used drill data.
of statistical or geostatistical procedures to
quantify the relative accuracy of the resource • Reported mine production figures (1990) as follows:
within stated confidence limits, or, if such an o Flat Mine (Nababeep) – 0.15Mt @ 2.72% Cu ~ 3,841t Cu;
approach is not deemed appropriate, a o Jan Coetzee Mine – 1.9Mt @ 1.05% Cu ~ 19,888t Cu; and
qualitative discussion of the factors that could
affect the relative accuracy and confidence of o Nababeep Kloof Mine – 0.2Mt @ 1.39% Cu ~ 2,507t Cu.
the estimate.
• The statement should specify whether it relates to
global or local estimates, and, if local, state the
relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to
technical and economic evaluation.
Documentation should include assumptions
made and the procedures used.
• These statements of relative accuracy and
confidence of the estimate should be compared
with production data, where available.
Date: 29-03-2021 09:09:00
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 
