Sharenet Sites 
Sharenet Sites
Mineral Resource Update: UG2 Indicated Mineral Resource doubles to 6.52 Moz (7E) with an increase in grade
Southern Palladium Limited
Incorporated in the Commonwealth of Australia
Australian Company Number 646 391 899
ASX share code: SPD
JSE share code: SDL
ISIN AU0000220808
("Southern Palladium" or "the Company")
Mineral Resource Update: UG2 Indicated Mineral Resource doubles to 6.52 Moz (7E) with an
increase in grade
Highlights:
• The UG2 Indicated Mineral Resource for the Bengwenyama project has doubled to 5.40 Moz (4E) or
6.52 Moz (7E) at a grade of 8.08 g/t and 9.75 g/t respectively. Total UG2 Mineral Resource ounces
(Indicated and Inferred) are now 12.99 Moz (4E) and 15.72 Moz(7E).
• Total UG2 and Merensky Reef (MR) Mineral Resource ounces (Indicated and Inferred) are now 26.22
Moz.
• The total UG2 4E resource grade is now 7.95g/t, 5.9% higher than the earlier resource. The total
UG2 7E grade is 5.6% higher at 9.63g/t.
• New drilling focus is to convert more inferred Mineral Resources to Indicated Mineral Resources in
the North Horst Block.
• The Resource Upgrade will contribute to an updated Scoping Study, which is now well underway and
is scheduled for release in January 2024.
Southern Palladium (ASX:SPD and JSE:SDL), 'Southern Palladium' or 'the Company') is pleased to release
a second Mineral Resource update for the UG2 Reef for the Bengwenyama Platinum Group Metal (PGM)
project, located on the Eastern Limb of the world class Bushveld Complex, South Africa.
Managing Director Johan Odendaal, said: "The planned conversion of the shallow eastern portion of the
Eerstegeluk UG2 Reef has now been successfully completed, resulting in the upgrade of Indicated Mineral
Resources. The Indicated Mineral Resource has doubled to 6.52 Moz at a 7E grade of 9.75g/t, contributing
to a total Mineral Resource (Indicated and Inferred) of 26.22 Moz. The Indicated resource now represents
41.6% of the 13Moz total UG2 mineral resource estimate. Pleasingly, the results not only doubled the
Indicated resource, they were also accompanied by a 5-6% increase in grade.
Combined with the strong metallurgical test results released earlier this week, the resource upgrade
further confirms Bengwenyama's standing as a significant PGM development project. These results will
allow the publication of production forecasts and economic parameters from the forthcoming Scoping
Study, due for release early next year.
The drilling focus has now shifted to the North Horst Block to convert the Inferred Mineral Resource and
Exploration Target into Indicated Mineral Resources for the upcoming Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS). The
Northern Horst Block will potentially convert both the Merensky Reef (MR) as well as the UG2 Reef as this
area falls west of the MR sub-crop."
UG2 Mineral Resource Upgrade
The planned conversion of the shallow eastern portion of the Eerstegeluk UG2 Reef to an Indicated
Mineral Resource has resulted in a second Mineral Resource update for the UG2 Reef. The UG2 Indicated
Mineral Resource has increased by 104% to 5.40 Moz at a 3PGE + Au (4E) grade of 8.08 g/t and 6.52 Moz
at a 6PGE + Au grade (7E) of 9.75 g/t.
The latest drilling focused on the conversion of the UG2 Inferred Mineral Resources to Indicated Mineral
Resources in the south-east portion of the Eerstegeluk farm (refer Figure 4). The total Mineral Resource
(Indicated and Inferred) for the UG2 Reef has seen an increase of 7.9% from 12.04 Moz to 12.99 Moz (4E).
Future drilling will likely result in additional Inferred Mineral Resources being added once the focus of the
drilling programme moves away from infill drilling. The MR is largely unchanged.
Table 1 below shows the consolidated UG2 Mineral Resource as at 1 December 2023. Consistent with the
previous Mineral Resource update (refer ASX Announcement 30 May 2023), geological losses have been
applied and the resource is declared at a pay limit of 1.9 g/t using a 4E basket price of US$2,654/oz.
Importantly, no Mineral Resource falls below the pay limit. It is envisaged that the resource mining cut
will be around 1 metre based on the observation that chromitite stringers are commonly absent in the
drilled area and by comparison with other mines in the area.
Table 1: UG2 Mineral Resource as at 1 December 2023
Reef Pt Pd Rh Au Ir Os Ru 4E 7E Cu Ni Cr2O3 (4E) (7E)
Resource Tonnes
width
Classification (Mt) (g/t) (%) Moz
(cm)
Indicated 20.80 73 3.60 3.61 0.75 0.12 0.25 0.17 1.24 8.08 9.75 0.03 0.16 30.19 5.40 6.52
Inferred 29.99 74 3.63 3.37 0.77 0.10 0.26 0.17 1.25 7.87 9.54 0.04 0.16 29.12 7.58 9.20
Note: All elements have been estimated individually and their combined grade will vary slightly from the estimated composite 4E and 7E
modelled grades
The full mining width will be determined as part of future mining studies and will incorporate dilution by
low or nil grade hanging wall and footwall dilution, as is seen in most operations within the Bushveld
Complex.
The total combined Mineral Resource for the UG2 and MR as at 1 December 2023 is summarised in Table
2. The combined Indicated Mineral Resource for the project, on a 7E basis, is now 8.43 Moz ounces with
a combined Inferred Mineral Resource of 17.80 Moz. The total Mineral Resource (Indicated and Inferred)
is now 26.22 Moz. These Mineral Resources include 15.72Moz indicated and inferred for the UG2 reef.
Table 2: Combined UG2 and MR Mineral Resource as at 1 December 2023
Tonnes Thickness Pt Pd Rh Au Ir Os Ru 4E 7E Cu Ni Moz Moz
Reef Resource Category
Mt (m) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (%) (%) (4E) (7E)
Merensky Indicated 21.59 2.05 1.59 0.65 0.10 0.12 0.03 0.03 0.21 2.48 2.75 0.038 0.125 1.72 1.91
Merensky Inferred 77.90 1.97 2.01 0.81 0.13 0.15 0.04 0.04 0.25 3.10 3.43 0.035 0.119 7.77 8.60
Total 99.49 1.99 1.92 0.78 0.12 0.14 0.04 0.04 0.24 2.97 3.28 0.035 0.120 9.49 10.50
UG2 Indicated 20.80 0.73 3.60 3.61 0.75 0.12 0.25 0.17 1.24 8.08 9.75 0.033 0.162 5.40 6.52
UG2 Inferred 29.99 0.74 3.63 3.37 0.77 0.10 0.26 0.17 1.25 7.87 9.54 0.038 0.165 7.58 9.20
Total 50.79 0.73 3.62 3.47 0.76 0.11 0.26 0.17 1.25 7.95 9.63 0.036 0.164 12.99 15.72
Total 150.28 1.57 2.49 1.69 0.34 0.13 0.11 0.08 0.58 4.65 5.43 0.04 0.13 22.48 26.22
Note: All elements have been estimated individually and their combined grade will vary slightly from the estimated composite 4E and 7E
modelled grades.
The UG2 Exploration Target* as at 1 December 2023 is summarised in Table 3. The UG2 Exploration Target
is based on the kriged estimation model beyond the inferred perimeter with a 20% range applied to the
grade and tonnage.
*The potential quantity and grade of the Exploration Target is conceptual in nature and there has been
insufficient exploration to estimate a Mineral Resource and it is uncertain if further exploration will result
in the estimation of a Mineral Resource.
Table 3: UG2 Exploration Target as at 1 December 2023
Minimum tonnes Maximum tonnes Minimum grade Maximum grade
Category Reef
(Mt) (Mt) (3PGE+Au g/t) (3PGE+Au g/t)
Exploration Target UG2 38 58 6.4 9.6
UG2 Mineral Resource Estimation
The UG2 geological and estimation models have been updated to include drilling and assaying data as at
end of October 2023. The estimation model utilised 59 drillholes with complete UG2 intersections (Figure
1).
The Mineral Resource was estimated using Ordinary Kriging.
Figure 1 shows the 4E g/t resultant model with the drillhole positions used in the estimation. No capping
was applied to the estimation and the kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) recommended a block size
of 350m with a minimum and maximum number of samples of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search
volume. Three search volumes with decreasing samples were used for the estimation.
All elements (Pt, Pd, Rh, Au, Ir, Os, Ru, Cu, Ni, Cr and Fe) were estimated individually as well as a combined
4E (Pt, Pd, Rh & Au) and 7E (Pt, Pd, Rh, Ir, Os, Ru & Au). The average 4E prill splits for Pt:Pd:Rh:Au of 45.5%
: 43.6% : 9.5% : 1.4% were determined using these estimates. The Cr:Fe ratio of the UG2 chromitite
horizon, from modelled Cr and Fe analysis, is 1.21. A density of 3.93 t/m3 was used in the tonnage
estimate.
There has been an increase in the average grade of the project, due to the additional reef intersections
obtained during the recent drilling. This resource estimate is based on 59 drillhole intersections compared
to the 34 drillhole intersections in the previous estimate. The arithmetic mean of the 4E and 7E grades
increased from 7.71 g/t to 8.20 g/t and from 9.35 g/t to 9.88 g/t respectively. This grade increase has
translated into the resource model. The areas of higher grade can be seen in the area around the edge of
the dome structure in the southeast (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Modelled 3PGE+Au g/t Plot of the UG2 Reef
The UG2 structures are now also better understood with the updated 3D structural model for the UG2
(Figure 2) being utilised for the scoping study. The overall geological losses applied to the Indicated and
Inferred Mineral Resources for the UG2 are now 21% and 24% respectively.
Figure 2: Oblique View of the 3D Structural Model of the UG2 Reef
Mineral Resource Categories
The Mineral Resource categories (Figure 3) were determined based on the QAQC, slope of regression
(SOR), kriging efficiency (KE) and continuity of the UG2 Reef horizon. These are measures in the confidence
of the kriged estimation. The Exploration Target Range is extrapolated from the boundary of the inferred
Mineral Resource to the project perimeter.
Figure 3: UG2 Mineral Resource Categories
Ongoing drill programme
The initial payback area (Figure 4) in the shallow portion of Eerstegeluk has now successfully been
converted to Indicated Mineral Resources. The drilling focus now turns to the North Horst Block (Figure
3) to convert the Inferred Mineral Resource and Exploration Target to Indicated Mineral Resources for the
forthcoming PFS. Drilling will still continue in the southern horst block to better understand the geology
of this area. Infill drilling will continue in the eastern portion of Eerstegeluk to continually filling gaps.
To date 23,347m have been completed, which is comprised of 67 completed drillholes and 29 deflections
(Figure 4).
Figure 4: Completed and Current Drillholes
Updated Scoping Study
The updated Scoping Study is now well underway and is scheduled for release in January 2024. This study
is being conducted concurrently with the Prefeasibility Study and will showcase the project's key metrics,
including net present value (NPV), cost estimation, and annual production figures. The Scoping Study will
include results from recent metallurgical test work, which showed potential 4E PGM recovery rates from
the UG2 reef of between 80 and 85% with concentrate grades of 130 to 250g/t (4E) (refer ASX
Announcement 6 December 2023).
This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Southern Palladium Limited.
About Southern Palladium:
Southern Palladium Limited (ASX:SPD, JSE:SDL) is a dual-listed platinum group metal (PGM) company
developing the advanced Bengwenyama PGM project, particularly rich in palladium/rhodium, in South
Africa. The project is located on the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld Complex, which contains more than
70% of the world's known Platinum Group Metal (PGM) Resources.
The Company, holding a 70% stake in the project, will primarily concentrate on delivering a Pre-
Feasibility study. Additionally, following the completion of a geophysical survey conducted in 2022 and
the September 2023 submission of the Mining Right application, they will oversee the completion of
the diamond drill programme initiated in August 2022, along with several other concurrent technical
studies.
Bengwenyama presents a substantial opportunity in the global PGM market. Previous exploration
efforts have already yielded a JORC 2012-compliant Inferred Mineral Resource of 25.12Moz within two
ore horizons—the UG2 chromitite and Merensky Reef, achieved in 2023.
Moreover, an assessment conducted by mining industry consultants CSA Global in 2021, has identified
a significant exploration target beyond the currently explored area. The Company is led by a seasoned
on-ground management team, including some of South Africa's most distinguished mining industry
executives.
Competent Person Statement
1. Uwe Engelmann: The scientific and technical information contained in this announcement has been
reviewed, prepared and approved by Mr Uwe Engelmann (BSc (Zoo. & Bot.), BSc Hons (Geol.),
Pr.Sci.Nat. No. 400058/08, FGSSA). Mr Engelmann is a director of Minxcon (Pty) Ltd and a member
of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions, and has sufficient experience relevant
to the styles of mineralisation and activities being undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person, as
defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves'. Mr Engelmann has a beneficial interest in Southern Palladium through
a shareholding in Nicolas Daniel Resources Proprietary Limited.
For further information, please contact:
Johan Odendaal
Managing Director
Southern Palladium
Phone: +27 82 557 6088
Email: johan.odendaal@southernpalladium.com
7 December 2023
JSE Sponsor
Merchantec Capital
Media & investor relations inquiries: Sam Jacobs, Six Degrees Investor Relations: +61 423 755 909
Follow @SouthernPalladium on Twitter
Follow Southern Palladium on LinkedIn
Appendix 1. JORC Checklist – Table 1 Assessment and Reporting Criteria
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
Nature and quality of sampling (e.g. cut
channels, random chips, or specific
specialised industry standard 20 cm samples are taken within the reef horizon unless there is a lithological
measurement tools appropriate to the reason to deviate from this. A single sample is also taken in the hanging
minerals under investigation, such as wall and footwall to test for mineralisation in the direct waste rock. The
down hole gamma sondes, or handheld samples are split with a core saw and one half is submitted to the laboratory
XRF instruments, etc.). These examples and the other half keep in the core tray.
should not be taken as limiting the broad
meaning of sampling.
Include reference to measures taken to
ensure sample representivity and the
The core is orientated in such a way that the two halves are equal.
appropriate calibration of any
measurement tools or systems used.
Aspects of the determination of
Sampling techniques
mineralisation that are Material to the
Public Report. In cases where 'industry
standard' work has been done this
would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 The sampling methodology is standard and as per industry practice in the
m samples from which 3 kg was Bushveld Complex (BC). The samples are 20 cm in length and are split into
pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for two equal halves with one half being submitted for analysis. The core size
fire assay'). In other cases more starts as HQ (10 m to 50 m) but is NQ by the time the reef is intersected.
explanation may be required, such as
where there is coarse gold that has
inherent sampling problems. Unusual
commodities or mineralisation types
(e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.
Drill type (e.g. core, reverse circulation,
open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, The drillholes start with HQ (for approximately 10-50 m) in the weathered
auger, Bangka, sonic, etc.) and details zone but are then drilled NQ once in the fresher material. The drill rigs being
Drilling techniques (e.g. core diameter, triple or standard utilised have been the CS 1500, Delta 520 and a smaller Longyear 44.
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-
sampling bit or other type, whether core The drill contractor is Geomech Africa.
is oriented and if so, by what method,
etc.).
Initially the core was scanned in with the software ScanIT which scans the
core with high resolution photos and the geologists reconcile the depths
Method of recording and assessing core and core losses per 3 m run. The Core recoveries and RQD are then
and chip sample recoveries and results calculated for the drillhole. ScanIT has however been discontinued and the
assessed. core is now photographed and the core recovery and RQD is calculated
manually by the geological assistants.
The geologist informs the drilling supervisor at what depth the reef is
expected so that they can take extra precautions around the anticipated
Measures taken to maximise sample reef depth.
Drill sample recovery recovery and ensure representative
nature of the samples. The core recoveries are measured per 3 m run and if there is excessive
core loss in the reef horizon it is marked as a non-representative sample
and will not be used in the resource estimation process.
Whether a relationship exists between The core recoveries for the intersections submitted to the laboratory are all
sample recovery and grade and whether above 98%. If the core loss is excessive the sample is not submitted to the
sample bias may have occurred due to laboratory for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. Therefore, there will
preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse not be any sample bias due to poor recoveries.
material.
Whether core and chip samples have The core was initially scanned into ScanIT software which produced high
been geologically and geotechnically resolution images. This has however been discontinued. The logging is
logged to a level of detail to support conducted on paper log sheets or tablets at the core yard with dropdown
appropriate Mineral Resource menus. Legends have been set up in excel that cover the necessary
estimation, mining studies and detailed required for Mineral Resource estimation. Alpha angles and
metallurgical studies. structure detail is also observed and logged. The beta angle is not
measured as the core is not orientated but the downhole televiewer survey
Logging supplies structural orientation information which is incorporated into the
logs.
Whether logging is qualitative or
quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, Core logging is qualitative and utilises excel spreadsheets on tablets.
channel, etc.) photography.
The total drillhole is geologically logged and photographed and the
The total length and percentage of the televiewer survey is conducted from 100 m above the reef horizon for
relevant intersections logged. additional structural information.
If core, whether cut or sawn and The core is cut in two equal halves for sampling and storage purposes.
whether quarter, half or all core taken.
Sub-sampling
techniques and If non-core, whether riffled, tube
sample preparation sampled, rotary split, etc. and whether This project only makes use of core drilling.
sampled wet or dry.
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
The sample preparation code at ALS is PREP-31H which has the following
procedure: -
For all sample types, the nature, quality
and appropriateness of the sample Login of samples into the system, weighing, fine crushing of entire sample
preparation technique. to 70% - 2 mm, split off 500 g and pulverize split to better than 85% passing
75 microns.
The QAQC sequence is as follows: -
Quality control procedures adopted for If the batch is less than 20 samples the batch starts and ends with a blank
all sub-sampling stages to maximise and a CRM and duplicate are inserted into the sample stream. If the batch
representivity of samples. is great than 20 samples then the batch starts and ends with a blank and
every tenth sample is either a CRM, duplicate or blank. This equates to
between 20% and 10% QAQC samples.
Measures taken to ensure that the The sampling of the reef is reef material only except for the first and last
sampling is representative of the in-situ sample of the reef as it will have 2 cm of hanging wall or footwall material
material collected, including for instance to ensure the entire mineralisation is captured. This 2 cm dilution will be
results for field duplicate/second-half calculated into the reef width. The hanging wall and footwall are sampled
sampling. separately to the reef. Hence the reef samples are representative of the in-
situ reef horizon. Requested duplicates are pulp duplicates and the CRMs
are material from the UG2 and MR from African Mineral Standards (AMIS).
The reef horizon is sampled in 20 cm increments so that the grade
distribution can be observed if a mining cut is required. The UG2 reef is
approximately 70 cm wide and will have three to four samples which will be
composited later. The MR is wider at around 200 cm and will have about
Whether sample sizes are appropriate ten individual samples to determine the grade distribution. These will also
to the grain size of the material being be composited later for Mineral Resource Estimation purposes. Hanging
sampled. wall and footwall samples are also taken to check if there is any
mineralisation in the direct surrounding waste rock.
This is industry best practice for the BC.
The nature, quality and appropriateness The UG2 reef will be assayed for 4E and 7E as well as for Cu, Ni, Co, Cr
of the assaying and laboratory and Fe. The MR will be assayed for the same except the Cr and Fe as it is
procedures used and whether the not a chromitite seam but a pyroxenite layer.
technique is considered partial or total.
The ALS methods are as follows: -
PGM-ICP23 - Pt, Pd, Au package using lead fire assay with ICP-AES finish.
30 g nominal sample weight.
Rh-ICP28 - Fire assay fusion using lead flux with Pd collector for Rh
determination by ICPAES. 10 g nominal sample weight.
PGM-MS25NS - The Platinum Group Metals are separated from the
gangue material using the Nickel Sulphide Fire Assay procedure. After
dissolution of the pulp with aqua regia, PGMs are determined by ICP-MS.
ME-XRF26s - Analysis of Chromite ore samples by fused disc / XRF. This
method is suitable for the determination of major and minor elements in ore
samples which require a high dilution digest such as Chromite ores.
Quality of assay data Elements that will be analysed are Cr, Cu, Ni, Fe and Co.
and laboratory tests
The overall pass rate of the various QAQC samples is 90%.
All methodologies are total.
For geophysical tools, spectrometers,
handheld XRF instruments, etc., the All analytical work is undertaken by ALS Chemex South Africa (Pty) Ltd,
parameters used in determining the located in Johannesburg, which is part of the ALS group. The South African
analysis including instrument make and laboratory is ISO 17025 accredited by SANAS (South African National
model, reading times, calibrations Accreditation System).
factors applied and their derivation, etc.
Nature of quality control procedures QAQC procedure has been described above. In addition to the QAQC
adopted (e.g. standards, blanks, samples the analytical methodologies are also correlated with each other
duplicates, external laboratory checks) i.e. PGM-ICP23 and RH-ICP28 is compared to PGM-MS25NS. There is a
and whether acceptable levels of good correlation and on average are within 1% of each other over the 4E
accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision grade.
have been established.
The verification of significant
intersections by either independent or An umpire laboratory will be utilised as an additional check at a later stage.
alternative company personnel.
Discuss any adjustment to assay data. No adjustments have been made to the assayed results.
Verification of
sampling and Documentation of primary data, data The assay results are received from the laboratory in pdf format and excel
assaying entry procedures, data verification, data format. The excel form is imported into the Minxcon excel database. These
storage (physical and electronic) are checked by the senior geologist. The assay certificates are stored in the
protocols. project folder.
The use of twinned holes. No twinning has been undertaken to date.
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to Drillhole collar positions are initially recorded by handheld Garmin GPS.
locate drillholes (collar and down-hole Drillhole collar survey was conducted by Aero Geomatics (Pty) Ltd. All
Location of data surveys), trenches, mine workings and completed drillholes were surveyed by post-processing Kinematic
points other locations used in Mineral methodology. ("PPK"). The accuracy of PPK is 5 mm + 0.5 ppm horizontally
Resource estimation. and 10 mm + 1 ppm vertically. The survey was based on the World Geodetic
System 1984 ellipsoid, commonly known as WGS84.
SECTION 1: SAMPLING TECHNIQUES AND DATA
Criteria Explanation Detail
Specification of the grid system used. The coordinate system used is LO31.
Regional three-dimensional (3D) topography was constructed from regional
Quality and adequacy of topographic surface contours and Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) data. The
control. surface was trimmed 300–500 m beyond the Project perimeter.
The final drillhole spacing will be approximately 350 m. The drilling
completed to date or in progress has a wider spacing to get a better
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration understanding of the larger structural domains of the project. There are
Results. areas that have closer spacing (down to 175m) to better understand the
structural blocks
Whether the data spacing, and
Data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the Geological continuity is based on the knowledge of the surrounding area
distribution degree of geological and grade and 3D model constructed from historical data. 67 drillholes and 29
continuity appropriate for the Mineral deflections have been completed confirming the position of the UG2 reef.
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation Of the 14 drillholes expected to intersect the MR 11 have intersected the
procedure(s) and classifications reef and two have been faulted.
applied.
Whether sample compositing has been The 20cm (or larger) samples are composited to obtain the weighted
applied. average of the entire intersection.
Whether the orientation of sampling The drillholes are vertical drillholes and intersect the reef close to right
achieves unbiased sampling of possible angles. The sample is therefore unbiased. If the reef is faulted it will be
structures and the extent to which this is noted and if the reef intersection is not representative, it will not be used in
known, considering the deposit type. Mineral Resource estimations.
Orientation of data in If the relationship between the drilling
relation to geological orientation and the orientation of key
structure mineralised structures is considered to No sampling bias will be introduced based on the drilling orientation as they
have introduced a sampling bias, this are close to perpendicular.
should be assessed and reported if
material.
Samples are only handled by the drilling contractor and the Minxcon
The measures taken to ensure sample geological staff. There is a strict chain of custody that is followed from the
Sample security security. time the core leaves the drill site to the time the sample is received by the
laboratory.
The results of any audits or reviews of No audits have been undertaken on the drilling to date.
Audits or reviews sampling techniques and data.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
Type, reference name/number, location
and ownership including agreements or A Preferent Prospecting Right LP002PPR was granted to the
material issues with third parties such Bengwenyama Tribe's investment vehicle, Miracle Upon Miracle
as joint ventures, partnerships, Investments (Pty) Ltd in 2015 over the farms Eerstegeluk 327 KT and
overriding royalties, native title Nooitverwacht 324 KT. This was renewed in early 2021 and is valid until
Mineral tenement interests, historical sites, wilderness or February 2024. The Right covers all elements of potential economic
and land tenure national park and environmental interest.
status settings.
The security of the tenure held at the
time of reporting along with any known The right is valid until February 2024.
impediments to obtaining a licence to
operate in the area.
Exploration done by Drilling was undertaken by Rustenburg Platinum Mines from 1966 to
other parties 1985. Trojan exploration completed drilling on Eerstegeluk between
1990 and 1993. Drilling prior to 1994 was not used as part of this
Acknowledgment and appraisal of Mineral Resource estimate (MRE) due to the incomplete nature or
exploration by other parties. availability of the drillhole data. Nkwe completed drillholes in 2007–
2008. This drilling supports the MRE. Reconnaissance mapping has
been completed by previous operators.
The target UG2 and Merensky reefs occur within the Upper Critical
Deposit type, geological setting and Zone of the Rustenburg Layered Suite of the BC. These reefs are
Geology style of mineralisation. laterally continuous for tens to hundreds of kilometres. The UG2
comprises mineralised chromitite, whereas the Merensky Reef is
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
defined as the mineralised pyroxenitic zone between upper and lower
chromitite stringers. The BC is the world's largest igneous intrusion and
also the largest global repository of PGEs and chromitite. Both reefs are
stratiform with relatively minor disruptive structural features and
replacement deposits.
A summary of all information
material to the understanding of the
exploration results including a
tabulation of the following
information for all Material drillholes:
* easting and northing of the drillhole
collar
* elevation or RL (Reduced Level –
elevation above sea level in metres)
of the drillhole collar
* dip and azimuth of the hole
* down hole length and interception
depth
* hole length.
Drillhole
Information All drillholes were drilled -90 degrees.
The UG2 and MR geological and estimation models have been
updated to include drilling and assaying data as at end of November
2023. The structural / geological model utilised 20 historical Nkwe
drillholes and 67 SPD drillholes while the estimation model utilised 10
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
historical Nkwe drillholes and 48 SPD drillholes for the UG2 and 10
historical Nkwe drillholes and 8 SPD drillholes for the MR.
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 N/A
understanding of the report, the
Competent Person should clearly
explain why this is the case.
In reporting Exploration Results, With the Mineral Resource update the statistical analysis recommended
weighting averaging techniques, no top cutting of the grade. In the case of the MR there was one sample
maximum and/or minimum grade that was capped. The Mineral Resource has been declared at a paylimit
truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) of 1.9 g/t for the UG2 and 1.6 g/t for the MR.
and cut-off grades are usually Material The exploration target range is based on the kriged estimated value with
and should be stated. a 20% range applied to it.
Where aggregate intercepts
incorporate short lengths of high-grade
Data aggregation results and longer lengths of low-grade
methods results, the procedure used for such The individual 20cm samples are combined per drillhole per reef
aggregation should be stated and intersection for the composite grades used in the estimation process.
some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in
detail.
The assumptions used for any No metal equivalent has been reported but the various elements have
reporting of metal equivalent values been combined for 3PGE+Au grades (4E) and 6PGE+au grades (7E).
should be clearly stated.
If the geometry of the mineralisation
with respect to the drillhole angle is
Relationship known, its nature should be reported. The intersection lengths stated are the downhole lengths. The drillholes
between If it is not known and only the down are drilled at -90 degrees and the reef dip is expected to be
mineralisation hole lengths are reported, there should approximately 6 degrees. Therefore, the difference should be minimal.
widths and intercept be a clear statement to this effect (e.g.
lengths 'down hole length, true width not
known').
Appropriate maps and sections (with
scales) and tabulations of intercepts
should be included for any significant A map of the drillhole positions is included in this and the previous press
Diagrams discovery being reported These should release. A stratigraphic column has been completed for the project (in
include, but not be limited to a plan press releases). A section has been included in the press release.
view of drillhole collar locations and
appropriate sectional views.
Where comprehensive reporting of
all Exploration Results is not
practicable, representative reporting Reef intersection depths for all the drillholes have been reported in
Balanced of both low and high grades and/or the table below.
reporting widths should be practiced to avoid
misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Drilling
Detail Merensky Reef UG2 Reef
Intersection Intersection
BHID From (m) To (m) Comment From (m) To (m) Comment
Width (m) Width (m)
Highly
weathered & Hole s topped
E019 20.25 22.45 2.20 - - -
friable, short
inconclusive
Highly
weathered & Complete
E019a 19.55 22.35 2.80 315.85 316.61 0.76
friable, intersection
inconclusive
No M R
expected -
E060 - - - - - - Reef Missing
East of M R
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E060D1 - - - 178.78 179.29 0.51 intersection
East of M R
subcrop
No M R Complete
expected - intersection,
E062 - - - 31.27 32.30 1.03
East of MR moderately
subcrop weathered
Moderately
No M R weathered &
expected - faulted.
E062D1 - - - 31.45 32.27 0.82
East of MR Incomplete
subcrop intersection.
Corelos s .
Moderately
No M R weathered &
expected - faulted.
E062D2 - - - 31.16 31.56 0.40
East of MR Incomplete
subcrop intersection.
Corelos s .
No M R
expected - Complete
E058 - - - 140.88 141.29 0.41
East of MR intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E033 - - - 253.62 254.25 0.63
East of MR intersection
subcrop
Complete Complete
E028 66.70 68.66 1.96 373.26 373.79 0.53
intersection intersection
Complete
E004 210.77 212.90 2.13 517.33 517.57 0.24 Pothole
intersection
Deflection
E004D1 - - - 515.83 516.52 0.69 Pothole
below M R
Complete Complete
E030 143.00 144.68 1.68 409.55 410.07 0.52
intersection intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E025 - - - 260.42 261.32 0.90
East of MR intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E037 - - - - - - Pothole
East of MR
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E049 - - - - - - Faulted
East of MR
subcrop
Complete Complete
E031 122.40 124.29 1.89 416.57 417.19 0.62
intersection intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E044 - - - 258.75 259.42 0.67
East of MR intersection
subcrop
Complete
E016 159.68 160.59 0.91 Faulted 449.24 450.01 0.77
intersection
Complete Complete
E007 100.38 102.54 2.16 417.42 418.14 0.72
intersection intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E064 - - - 156.19 157.05 0.86
East of MR intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E071 - - - 180.04 180.73 0.69
East of MR intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E065 - - - 231.81 232.50 0.69
East of MR intersection
subcrop
Complete Complete
E001 259.82 261.64 1.82 548.07 549.21 1.14
intersection intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E015 - - - 291.89 292.63 0.74
East of MR intersection
subcrop
Complete
E020 54.20 55.39 1.19 Faulted 342.90 343.56 0.66
intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E041 - - - 250.95 251.60 0.65
East of M R intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E067 - - - 299.70 300.20 0.50
East of M R intersection
subcrop
Highly
weathered &
friable, Complete
E013 12.43 14.53 2.10 321.26 321.76 0.50
inconclusiv e intersection
(core loss &
No stringers )
No M R
expected - Complete
E024 - - - 278.77 279.26 0.49
East of M R intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Incomplete
E069 - - - 240.98 241.39 0.41
East of M R intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E027 - - - 284.47 285.04 0.57
East of M R intersection
wubcrop
Complete Complete
E014 37.28 39.68 2.40 342.62 343.68 1.06
intersection Intersection
No M R
expected - Complete
E069D1 - - - 241.33 241.63 0.30
East of M R Intersection
subcrop
Deflection Complete
E001D1 - - - 547.78 548.26 0.48
below M R Intersection
Incomplete
Deflection intersection,
E014D1 - - - 343.29 343.74 0.45
below M R core loss &
grinding
Deflection Complete
E014D2 - - - 342.19 343.06 0.88
below M R Intersection
Complete Complete
E032 171.69 173.78 2.09 462.66 463.98 1.32
intersection Intersection
Highly
weathered &
- - - 29.96 30.44 0.48
No M R friable,
expected - inconclusive
**E057
- - - East of MR 237.73 238.06 0.33 LG6A reef
subcrop
- - - 238.3 238.63 0.33 LG6 reef
- - - 238.66 239.85 1.19 LG6 reef
No M R
expected - Complete
E045 - - - 202.205 202.82 0.615
East of MR Intersection
subcrop
- - - No M R 324.59 325.02 0.43 LG6A reef
expected -
**E056 - - - 325.29 325.56 0.27 LG6 reef
East of MR
- - - subcrop 325.82 326.54 0.72 LG6 reef
No M R
expected - Complete
E052 - - - 246.01 247.04 1.03
East of MR Intersection
subcrop
No M R Incomplete
expected - intersection,
E072 - - - 248.48 249.07 0.59
East of MR core loss &
subcrop grinding
No M R
expected - Complete
E072D1 - - - 248.71 249.44 0.73
East of MR Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E072D2 - - - 248.64 249.28 0.64
East of MR Intersection
subcrop
core loss , top
E029 40.02 42 1.98 stringer only , 314.68 314.88 0.20 Pothole
inconclusive
No M R
expected - Complete
E050D1 - - - 276.37 276.90 0.53
East of M R Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E076 - - - 233.22 233.68 0.46
East of M R Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E029D1 - - - East of M R
315.08 315.10 0.02 Pothole
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E066 - - - East of M R
221.30 221.64 0.34 Intersection
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E066D1 - - - East of M R
221.19 221.63 0.44
Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E046 - - - East of M R
238.66 239.22 0.56
Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E048 - - - East of M R
229.77 230.36 0.59
Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E054 - - - East of M R
280.52 280.94 0.42
Intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E059 - - - East of M R
95.17 95.70 0.53
Intersection
subcrop
No M R Incomplete
expected - intersection,
E039 - - - East of M R
226.54 226.89 0.35
coreloss &
subcrop Faulted
No M R
expected - Complete
E039D1 - - - East of M R
226.85 227.56 0.71
intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E120 - - - East of M R
155.65 155.74 0.09 Pothole
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E082 - - - East of M R
243.15 243.47 0.32 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
Highly
Incomplete
weathered &
E034 25.67 30.15 4.48 292.00 292.94 0.94 intersection,
friable,
Faulted
inconclusive
No M R
expected - Complete
E082D1 - - - East of M R
243.25 243.67 0.42
intersection
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E086A - - - East of M R
255.62 255.78 0.16 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E086AD1 - - - East of M R
256.01 256.34 0.33 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
Highly
weathered & Complete
E087 23.68 28.17 4.49 287.97 288.43 0.46
friable, intersection
inconclusive
No M R
expected - Complete
E086AD2 - - - East of M R
255.46 255.71 0.25
intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E120D1 - - - East of M R
- - - Pothole
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E034D1 - - - East of M R
292.38 292.97 0.59 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R Incomplete
expected - intersection,
E070 - - - East of M R
185.15 185.72 0.57
friable &
subcrop Faulted
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E070D1 - - - East of M R
185.29 186.08 0.79 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E114 - - - East of M R
- - - Faulted
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E034D2 - - - East of M R
292.74 293.27 0.53 intersection,
faulted
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E051 - - - East of M R
95.33 95.80 0.47 intersection,
Grinding
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E080 - - - East of M R
188.64 189.12 0.48 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E085 - - - East of M R
247.34 247.91 0.57
intersection
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E079 - - - East of M R
263.00 263.39 0.39 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
expected -
E113 - - - East of M R
289.62 289.69 0.07 Pothole
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E051D1 - - - East of M R
95.22 96.36 1.14
intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E115 - - - East of M R
87.75 88.55 0.80
intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E118 - - - East of M R
288.56 289.45 0.89
intersection
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E122 - - - East of M R
179.19 179.75 0.56
intersection
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E125 - - - East of M R
228.25 228.70 0.45 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E125D1 - - - East of M R
228.44 229.03 0.59 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E035 - - - East of M R
253.92 254.43 0.51 intersection,
Crushed
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E035D1 - - - East of M R
253.94 254.44 0.50 intersection,
Crushed
subcrop
No M R
expected - Complete
E117 - - - East of M R
215.44 216.05 0.62
intersection
subcrop
No M R
Incomplete
expected -
E077 - - - East of M R
259.56 259.93 0.37 intersection,
Faulted
subcrop
Incomplete
Complete
E011 94.89 96.88 1.99 intersection, 399.23 400.43 1.20
intersection
Grinding
Incomplete Deflection
E011D1 94.89 96.91 2.02 intersection, - - - drilled for MR
Grinding Intersection
No M R
expected -
E043 - - - 258.25 258.41 0.16 Pothole
East of M R
subcrop
Complete Complete
E017 154.50 156.55 2.05 452.63 453.35 0.73
intersection intersection
No M R
expected -
E077D1 - - - East of M R
subcrop
Deflection
Complete
E011D2 94.99 96.98 2.00 - - - drilled for MR
intersection
Intersection
No M R
expected -
E043D1 - - - East of MR
257.55 258.38 0.83 Pothole
subcrop
Complete Complete
E100 283.31 284.66 1.34 498.58 499.04 0.46
intersection intersection
Incomplete
E124 - - - Faulted 350.06 350.61 0.56 intersection
(Faulted)
Complete
E003 272.02 274.20 2.18 Reconciliation in preogress
intersection
Other exploration data, if meaningful A high-definition helicopter borne Total Magnetic Field (TMF) gradient
and material, should be reported and gamma-ray spectrometry survey was completed by New Resolution
including (but not limited to): geological Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of 2022 which highlighted the
observations; geophysical survey major structural features that could be expected.
results; geochemical survey results;
Other substantive bulk samples – size and method of
exploration data treatment; metallurgical test results; The total line kilometres flown was 1,425 lkm over the farms
bulk density, groundwater, Eerstegeluk 327 KT and Nooitverwacht 324 KT with the survey being
geotechnical and rock characteristics; flown at a height between 25 m and 80 m due to the topography and
potential deleterious or contaminating residential areas with an average height of approximately 35 m to 40 m
substances. and a line spacing of 50 m.
SECTION 2: REPORTING OF EXPLORATION RESULTS
Criteria Explanation Detail
The nature and scale of planned further Phase 1a has been completed which was approximately 10,000m of
work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or drilling. This phase tested the wider area for the grade distribution and
depth extensions or large-scale step- bigger picture structural understanding. Phase 1b will now focus on the
out drilling). PFS payback area to convert the inferred resource in this area to
indicated resources. Deflections will now be drilled for short range
variability work. To date 23,347m have been completed but it is
envisaged approximately 14 000 more meters will be drilled.
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas
of possible extensions, including the
main geological interpretations and
future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially
sensitive.
Further work Above are the structural blocks modelled from the drillhole database
(UG2 on top and MR the second). The entire area is either in Mineral
Resource (indicated or inferred) or Exploration Target so there is limited
upside potential within the project boundaries.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Measures taken to ensure Geological data in the form of drillhole collar surveys, downhole surveys and
that data has not been geological logs captured on paper records was compared to data captured and
Database corrupted by, for example, saved in soft copy Excel spreadsheets that form the geological repository which
integrity transcription or keying informs the modelling database. Any errors, omissions, and invalid transcriptions
errors, between its initial identified were returned to the exploration team for rectification before the data
collection and its use for
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Mineral Resource was processed any further for use in 3D-structural modelling and grade
estimation purposes. estimation processes.
Base geological data informing the estimate was validated using in-built
functionality in Datamine StudioRM software. Validation routine involved
checking spatial location of drillholes collars and intersections, validity of
stratigraphic logging, checking for repetition of logged intersections, reasons for
Data validation procedures the absence of analytical data, negative thicknesses and an assessment of the
used. correlation of all aspects of the new drilling data to the historic drilling data from
the Nkwe drillhole database. The Nkwe database was inspected for erroneous /
non representative datapoints and removed based on the knowledge gained
from the recent SPD drilling.
Comment on any site visits
undertaken by the The Competent Person regularly visits the project site with the latest visit having
Competent Person and the been carried out on 16 November 2023.
Site visits outcome of those visits.
If no site visits have been
undertaken indicate why this Refer to above.
is the case.
The Bengwenyama project is bounded to the northern extremity by a mine that is
Confidence in (or in current operation and economically exploiting the same UG2 reef. Several
conversely, the uncertainty SPD drillholes are sited in areas in which similar drilling was completed by Nkwe
of) the geological Platinum during the early 2000s. Geological interpretation as informed from the
interpretation of the mineral current SPD holes, correlates reasonably well with interpretation from the historic
deposit. Nkwe drill data.
The consolidated SPD database informing this estimate incorporates data from
historic Nkwe drilling. This data was compiled by transcribing information from
documents available in the public domain. Analytical data in the Nkwe drillholes
Nature of the data used and is presented as 4E only. Individual PGEs were not reported. Results from QQ
of any assumptions made. plots (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest that SPD data is
highly comparable to the Nkwe data. Accordingly, the data has been
consolidated into a single geological database.
Literature from the public domain suggests absence of UG2 reef in the
Eerstegeluk Dome area. In contrast, recent SPD drilling (drillhole E057) located
The effect, if any, of within the area, intersected the UG2 reef at a depth of approximately 30m below
Geological alternative interpretations on surface. This implies the SPD drilling in the area is presenting an opportunity to
interpretation Mineral Resource validate the theory or potentially offer an alternative interpretation of this
estimation. structurally complex area of the project. However, at this stage the dome area
has been excluded from the Mineral Resource.
Contouring of the elevation of the UG2 reef and MR top contact as interpreted
from geological logging, knowledge of the regional structural geology,
The use of geology in incorporation of mapped faults, dykes, sills, and the use of data from the TMF
guiding and controlling gradient and gamma-ray spectrometry survey completed by New Resolution
Mineral Resource Geophysics (Pty) Ltd (NRG) in January of 2022, highlighting the major structural
estimation. features, guided delineation of 30 fault blocks and culminated in the generation
of the associated UG2 3D wireframe model.
The project area is bisected by faults and several dyke swarms with throws in
excess of 200m. Current structural interpretation postulates the Eerstegeluk
The factors affecting Dome area comprises a stack of several upthrow faults culminating in an overall
continuity both of grade and upthrow of the UG2 reef to a location as shallow as 30m below surface. Other
geology. than potholing observed in the areas limited to the northern periphery, the PGE
grades appear unaffected.
The extent and variability of The Bengwenyama project covers an area of approximately 52.9km 2. with a
the Mineral Resource strike of approximately 4km. Data from the drillholes suggests a down-dip
expressed as length (along continuity of UG2 and MR reef over approximately 11km at an average true dip
strike or otherwise), plan of approximately 6-7*, north-west.
width, and depth below
surface to the upper and
lower limits of the Mineral
Resource.
Dimensions Location of the UG2 reef is shallowest in the south-east corner of the project
area at approximately 30m below surface and deepest in the north-west corner
where it is in excess of 1,000m below surface. The MR is approximately 260m
above the UG2 reef and subcrops in the central portion of the farm Eerstegeluk.
The nature and The statistical analysis on the base geological data informing the estimate
appropriateness of the suggests that no capping or treatment of extreme values is necessary. Owing to
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
estimation technique(s) the low density of drilling data available to date geological domains, possible
applied and key facies and anisotropy has not been identified. However, for the MR one sample
assumptions, including was capped back to 4.68 g/t for the 4E grade (see below).
treatment of extreme grade
values, domaining,
interpolation parameters
and maximum distance of
extrapolation from data
points. If a computer Ordinary Kriging, an industry best choice for evaluation of PGEs, has been
assisted estimation method successfully applied for all grade interpolation with all 3D wireframe modelling
was chosen include a and grade estimation processes completed in Datamine StudioRM Version
description of computer 1.11.65.0 geological modelling software.
software and parameters
used. Kriging neighbourhood analysis (KNA) recommended a parent block size of
350m (in X and Y directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples
of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search volume which is matched to the
range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately 2,000m). Three search
volumes with decreasing samples were used for the estimation.
All PGE elements, Pt, Pd, Rh, Au, Ir, Os and Ru as well as base metals Cu, Ni,
Cr and Fe were individually estimated in addition to estimation of combined 4E
(Pt, Pd, Rh & Au) and 7E (Pt, Pd, Rh, Ir, Os, Ru & Au) grades.
Extrapolation has been carried out to half the average drillhole spacing and
where applicable terminated on the major geological structures.
The availability of check The Bengwenyama Project is a green field project with no mining activity ever
estimates, previous recorded. As such no depletion of Mineral Resources is applicable.
estimates and/or mine
production records and The previous estimate for the Bengwenyama Project was declared on 01 July
whether the Mineral 2021 and presented 33.87Mt at 7.7g/t 4E and 8.38Moz in Inferred Resources.
Estimation Resource estimate takes
and modelling appropriate account of such Taking into account the impact of the additional SPD drilling completed to date,
techniques data. the previous estimate correlates reasonably well with the first update updated
estimate of 49.85Mt at 7.51g/t 4E and 12.040Moz of Indicated and Inferred
Resources for the UG2 with the MR also having very similar results. The second
update grades are also very similar.
Metallurgical testwork is currently underway to establish the viability of recovery
The assumptions made of any by-products, in particular chromite. There is no record of previous similar
regarding recovery of by- testwork completed in the Bengwenyama project area. However, the UG2 on the
products. eastern limb of the BC is well known and understood and the average recoveries
have been assumed for now.
Estimation of deleterious
elements or other non-grade Other than the base metals Cu, Ni and Fe, no deleterious elements have been
variables of economic identified. The base metals have all been estimated on elemental basis with the
significance (e.g. sulphur for Cr:Fe ratio of the UG2 chromitite horizon, from modelled Cr and Fe analysis,
acid mine drainage observed to be around 1.21.
characterisation).
In the case of block model Drillhole spacing is not on a defined grid owing to challenges drilling in populated
interpolation, the block size space. The well drilled areas are typically informed by an average drillhole
in relation to the average spacing of approximately 350m with areas even closer at approximately 175m
sample spacing and the spacing with poorly informed areas informed by drilling spacing in excess of
search employed. 1,000m.
Kriging neighbourhood analysis (QKNA) recommended a parent block size of
350m (in X and Y directions) with a minimum and maximum number of samples
of 5 and 15 respectively for the first search volume which is matched to the
range of the 4E modelled variogram (approximately 2,000m). Three search
volumes with decreasing samples were used for grade estimation.
A study to test the viability of several possible options and in some cases
Any assumptions behind combinations of mining methods is currently underway. The current modelling
modelling of selective does not incorporate guidance from knowledge of any possible proposed mining
mining units. method or selective mining approach.
The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest SPD
data is highly comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data.
Estimation Any assumptions about
and modelling correlation between
techniques variables.
(continued)
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
Accordingly, the data was consolidated into a single database. The consolidation
enabled expansion of the database to incorporate back-calculated individual Pt,
Pd, Rh and Au grades from the single analytical 4E grade in the Nkwe drillholes
basing on prill splits as established from the complete empirical SPD analytical
dataset. The grades for Os, Ir and Ru were then determined from regression
relationships enabling the estimation and eventual reporting to 7E grade and
including base metals.
Major structural discontinuities were identified from interpretation of the TMF
gradient and gamma-ray spectrometry survey, field mapping and contouring of
elevation of the UG2 reef top contact. Knowledge of regional structural geology
Description of how the and regional geological losses guided delineation of fault blocks and the
geological interpretation generation of the resultant UG2 and MR 3D wireframe model.
was used to control the
resource estimates. Application of results such as the modelled variogram ranges, spatial continuity
of kriging efficiencies and the slope of regression results, the sample search
volume used and the number of samples informing a grade estimate constrained
grade extrapolations beyond known drill data.
Statistical analysis on the raw data informing the estimate suggests that no
Discussion of basis for capping or treatment of extreme values is necessary, other than one sample for
using or not using grade the MR, and does show reasonable support for geological domaining or any
cutting or capping. possible anisotropy.
The process of validation, Integrity of grade estimation was validated through swath plots in the X and Y
the checking process used, directions, sample-to-model box-whisker plots on global means for all estimated
the comparison of model grades and the visual analysis of grade plans for the 4E and 7E grades as well
data to drillhole data, and as plans showing the spatial distribution of the UG2 reef thickness, Slope of
use of reconciliation data if Regression, Kriging Efficiencies, Search Volume and the number of samples
available. used to inform grades estimates.
Whether the tonnages are
estimated on a dry basis or
Moisture with natural moisture, and All tonnages are reported on a dry basis.
the method of determination
of the moisture content.
Zone specific geological losses have been applied and the Mineral Resources
are declared at a paylimit of 1.9 g/t and 1.6 g/t 4E using a basket price of USD
2,654/oz and USD 1,888/oz for the UG2 Reef and MR respectively. No mining
cut has been applied at this stage as the supporting geotechnical work is still in
progress.
Below are the parameters used for the basket price and pay limit calculation.
Cut-off The basis of the adopted Element Resource price (USD/oz) 4E prill split 7E prill split Recovery Payability
parameters cut-off grade(s) or quality Platinum 1,025 45.3% 37.5% 85% 86%
parameters applied. Palladium 2,200 43.5% 36.0% 85% 86%
Rhodium 12,400 9.7% 8.0% 85% 86%
Gold 2,000 1.5% 1.2% 85% 86%
Ruthenium 465 0.0% 13.0% 71% 55%
Iridium 4,600 0.0% 2.6% 75% 45%
Osmium 400 0.0% 1.7% 75% 45%
Assumptions made
regarding possible mining
methods, minimum mining
dimensions and internal (or,
if applicable, external) It is envisaged that the Mineral Resource mining cut will be approximately 1m for
mining dilution. It is always the UG2 due to the absence of stringers in footprint of the currently drilled area.
necessary as part of the The hanging wall contact is a distinct Leuconorite plane referred to as the
process of determining Leuconorite Parting Plane (LPP) and forms a distinct sharp hanging wall contact
reasonable prospects for with no chromitite stringers above it. For the MR the mining cut will probably be
eventual economic the reef width, which is approximately 2,00m plus 10cm hanging wall and 10cm
Mining factors extraction to consider footwall dilution.
or potential mining methods,
assumptions but the assumptions made Mining studies on the possible practical mining methods or a combination thereof
regarding mining methods are currently being concluded.
and parameters when
estimating Mineral The current geological modelling does not incorporate any assumptions or
Resources may not always provide any form of guidance for a chosen specific mining method.
be rigorous. Where this is
the case, this should be
reported with an explanation
of the basis of the mining
assumptions made.
The basis for assumptions Samples for metallurgical testwork for the UG2 have been collected from site
Metallurgical or predictions regarding and submitted to the SGS and Suntech Geomet laboratories to establish the
factors or metallurgical amenability. It most optimal recovery method or a combination thereof.
assumptions is always necessary as part
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
of the process of The current geological modelling supporting this estimate does not incorporate
determining reasonable any assumptions or provide guidance for a specific recovery method.
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.
Assumptions made
regarding possible waste
and process residue
disposal options. It is always
necessary as part of the
process of determining
reasonable prospects for
eventual economic
extraction to consider the
potential environmental A series of specialised environmental studies are in the process of being
impacts of the mining and commissioned to establish a balance between compliance of the eventual
processing operation. While chosen mining method to environmental regulations against optimal and
Environmental at this stage the practical extraction that will achieve the least environmental impact.
factors or determination of potential
assumptions environmental impacts, The current geological modelling supporting this estimate does not incorporate
particularly for a greenfields any assumptions or provide guidance to achieve the least environmental impact.
project, may not always be
well advanced, the status of
early consideration of these
potential environmental
impacts should be reported.
Where these aspects have
not been considered this
should be reported with an
explanation of the
environmental assumptions
made.
Whether assumed or
determined. If assumed, the A density of 3.93 t/m3 for the UG2 and 3.28 t/m3 for the MR was used in the
basis for the assumptions. If tonnage estimation. The density was determined empirically using the
determined, the method Archimedes method on UG2 reef and MR intersection samples from a population
used, whether wet or dry, from 45 and 81 diamond drill core samples respectively from 14 SPD drillholes.
the frequency of the The determination of density is an ongoing exercise conducted by the field
measurements, the nature, exploration team to expand the database for use to support tonnage estimates.
size and representativeness
of the samples.
The bulk density for bulk
material must have been
Bulk density measured by methods that
adequately account for void The density was determined empirically using the Archimedes method on UG2
spaces (vugs, porosity, reef and MR intersection samples.
etc.), moisture and
differences between rock
and alteration zones within
the deposit.
Discuss assumptions for
bulk density estimates used Not applicable
in the evaluation process of
the different materials.
The basis for the The Mineral Resource categories were determined based on the QAQC, slope of
classification of the Mineral regression (SOR), kriging efficiency (KE) and knowledge of the continuity of the
Classification Resources into varying UG2 reef horizon.
confidence categories.
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
The Indicated Mineral Resources are based on a SOR greater than 0.6, a KE
greater than 0.3, a search volume less than 2.5 as well as application of local
knowledge of areas with high confidence in UG2 reef continuity.
The Inferred Mineral Resources are based on a SOR of greater than 0.3,
extrapolation based on half the distance of the range of the 4E grade variogram
with termination onto the major structural discontinuities. The footprint of the
Exploration Target Range is extrapolated from the boundary of Inferred Mineral
Resources to the project perimeter fence.
Whether appropriate Geological losses have been applied to the resource to account for the effects of
account has been taken of faults, dykes, and potholes. This was estimated by considering the successful
all relevant factors (i.e. drillhole intersections, identified major faults and dykes from the TMF geophysics
relative confidence in and additional minor losses. The project area was divided into larger blocks
tonnage/grade estimations, representing various degrees of geological losses. The geological losses for the
reliability of input data, UG2 range from 21% to 40% for the Exploration Target area with the
confidence in continuity of Eerstegeluk Dome area completely excluded at this stage of reporting.
geology and metal values, For the MR the geological losses range from 18% to 40% for the Exploration
quality, quantity and Target area and the top 40m (vertically) at the subcrop for the MR is also
distribution of the data). excluded due to weathering and oxidation.
Whether the result The CP is of the opinion that the Mineral Resource classification criteria and
appropriately reflects the associated results are a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody and
Competent Person's view of demonstrate the current levels of confidence as informed by drill data.
the deposit.
The Mineral Resources estimate, as well as processes associated with
The results of any audits or estimation work as contained in this press release has been reviewed by an
Audits or reviews of Mineral Resource independent third party, Mr. Garth Mitchell, of ExplorMine Consultants (Pty) Ltd.
reviews estimates. Mr. Mitchell confirms validity and reasonableness of estimate and confirms that
due care and diligence was applied in the compilation.
Where appropriate a The QQ plot results (R2=0.93 for the UG2 and R2=0.81 for the MR) suggest the
statement of the relative SPD data is highly comparable to the Nkwe historic drill data and that the two
accuracy and confidence datasets can be consolidated into a single database without any issues.
level in the Mineral
Discussion of Resource estimate using an The consolidation enabled back-calculation of individual Pt, Pd, Rh and Au
relative approach or procedure grades from the single analytical 4E grade in the Nkwe drillholes basing on prill
accuracy/ deemed appropriate by the splits established from the complete empirical SPD analytical dataset as well at
confidence Competent Person. For determining individual grades for Os, Ir and Ru from regression relationships.
example, the application of This has enabled reporting to 7E grade.
statistical or geostatistical
procedures to quantify the
SECTION 3: ESTIMATION AND REPORTING OF MINERAL RESOURCES
Criteria Explanation Detail
relative accuracy of the The UG2 Exploration Target is based on the estimated kriged value of the
resource within stated drillhole database with a 20% range applied to it.
confidence limits, or, if such
an approach is not deemed
appropriate, a qualitative
discussion of the factors
that could affect the relative
accuracy and confidence of
the estimate.
The statement should
specify whether it relates to
global or local estimates,
and, if local, state the
relevant tonnages, which The CP is of the opinion that geological modelling underlying the estimate
should be relevant to contained in this press release is a true reflection of the Bengwenyama orebody
technical and economic and considers the grade and tonnage estimates robust.
evaluation. Documentation
should include assumptions
made and the procedures
used.
These statements of relative
accuracy and confidence of
the estimate should be Not applicable
compared with production
data, where available.
Date: 07-12-2023 09:00:00
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.
