Further Encouraging Lithium Results, Portugal
Savannah Resources Plc / Index: AIM / Epic: SAV / Sector: Mining
22 November 2017
Savannah Resources Plc
Further Encouraging Lithium Results Returned from Mina do Barroso Lithium Project, Portugal
Savannah Resources plc (AIM: SAV) ('Savannah' or 'the Company'), the AIM quoted resource development company, is pleased to announce further results from the ongoing reverse circulation ('RC') drill programme for the Mina do Barroso Lithium Project ('Mina do Barroso' or the 'Project') in Portugal (Figure 1). The drill programme, which is aimed at defining a JORC - 2012 compliant Mineral Resource Estimate, has returned significant intersections of lithium mineralisation. To view the press release with the illustrative maps and diagrams please use the following link:
http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/1592X_-2017-11-21.pdf
HIGHLIGHTS:
· Completed a further 27 holes for 2,566m with assays for the first 11 holes confirming extensions to the existing mineralisation
· Reservatorio Deposit: drilling significantly extends lithium mineralisation to over 400m strike length, with good down dip extensions of at least 150m. Results from the second round of drilling to date include:
- 29m at 1.07% Li₂O from 43m in 17RESRC10
- 35m at 1.06% Li₂O from 56m in 17RESRC11
· NOA Deposit: drilling has confirmed the presence of lithium mineralisation over a 100m strike length together with good down dip extensions of at least 50m. Results received to date from the second round of drilling include:
- 13m at 1.19% Li₂O from 7m in 17NOARC03
- 11m at 1.23% Li2O from 46m in 17NOARC04
· The Reservatorio, Grandao and NOA deposits remain open along strike and down dip leaving excellent upside potential for all deposits
· Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate for Reservatorio expected by the end of 2017
· Further mapping at five additional high priority targets, some with significant historical drill intersects, has also commenced to fast track the targets to drilling
· Phase 2 of the Metallurgical Test Work programme is due to get underway at Nagrom in Perth by the end of November 2017
Savannah's CEO, David Archer said: "The drilling results to date continue to underscore the potential of the Mina do Barroso Project to be a strategic upstream feature in the European lithium value chain. From an investment perspective, we see the Project as the closest European analogue to the very successful Australian hard-rock, open cut mine developments which produce highly sought-after lithium spodumene concentrates for international markets.
"Drilling and metallurgical test work is ongoing and will be used to support an early scoping study around a potential mine development."
Figure 1. Mina do Barroso Project Summary Map showing prospects and 2017 drilling - see PDF link
Reservatorio
A further 12 drill holes for 1,322m have now been completed at Reservatorio. Assay results from the first six holes have now been received and have confirmed significant extensions to the already identified lithium mineralisation (Table 1-2 and Figure 2-3) in pegmatite, with mineralisation now defined along a 400m strike length and to at least 150m down dip confirming the potential for good depth extensions of the lithium mineralisation. Drilling in an area of faulting and shearing on the eastern part of the pegmatite has caused the pegmatite to become weathered resulting in some zones of near surface depletion. Further infill drilling is now required to further define these zones.
Table 1. Summarised downhole geology for recent Reservatorio Drilling
|
HOLE ID |
SUMMARISED DOWNHOLE GEOLOGY |
|
17RESRC09 |
Pegmatite/Schist 0-13m; Pegmatite/Schist 19-20m; Pegmatite 20-25m; Pegmatite/Schist 25-26m; Pegmatite/Schist 32-33m; Pegmatite 33-52m; Pegmatite/Schist 52-53m |
|
17RESRC10 |
Pegmatite/Schist 19-21m; Pegmatite 21-35m; Pegmatite/Schist 35-37m; Pegmatite/Schist 39-40m; Pegmatite/Schist 42-43m; Pegmatite 43-56m; Pegmatite/Schist 56-58m; Pegmatite 58-72m; Pegmatite/Schist 75-80m |
|
17RESRC11 |
Pegmatite/Schist 21-23m; Pegmatite/Schist 54-60m; Pegmatite 60-87m; Pegmatite/Schist 87-90m; Pegmatite 90-91m; Pegmatite/Schist 91-92m; Pegmatite/Schist 100-103m |
|
17RESRC12 |
Pegmatite/Schist 30-31m; Pegmatite 31-66m; Pegmatite/Schist 66-67m |
|
17RESRC13 |
Pegmatite/Schist 4-7m; Pegmatite 7-34m |
|
17RESRC14 |
Pegmatite/Schist 16-19m; Pegmatite/Schist 33-36m; Pegmatite 36-42m; Pegmatite 47-66m; Pegmatite/Schist 66-68m |
Table 2. Summary of drill results for Reservatorio reported at a 0.2% and 0.5% Li2O cut-off
|
Prospect |
Hole ID |
0.2% Li2O Cut Off |
0.5% Li2O Cut Off |
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC09 |
4m at 0.29% Li2O from 22m |
11m @ 0.84% Li2O from 35m |
|
|
|
14m @ 0.71% Li2O from 32m |
1m @ 0.87% Li2O from 50m |
|
|
|
4m at 0.34% Li2O from 49m |
|
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC10 |
1m at 0.2% Li2O from 36m |
29m @ 1.07% Li2O from 43m |
|
|
|
29m @ 1.07% Li2O from 43m |
2m @ 1.13% Li2O from 76m |
|
|
|
4m @ 0.68% Li2O from 75m |
|
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC11 |
37m @ 1.02% Li2O from 54m |
35m @ 1.06% Li2O from 56m |
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC12 |
1m at 0.21% Li2O from 35m |
No Significant Results |
|
|
|
8m at 0.22% Li2O from 53m |
|
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC13 |
No Significant Results |
No Significant Results |
|
Reservatorio |
17RESRC14 |
1m @ 0.59% Li2O from 39m |
1m @ 0.59% Li2O from 39m |
|
|
|
18m @ 0.75% Li2O from 47m |
16m @ 0.79% Li2O from 48m |
Figure 2. Summary of drilling at Reservatorio, together with historical drill holes and planned drill holes - see PDF link
Figure 3. Reservatorio: Cross Section through 17RESRC04, 17RESRC05 and 17RES07 (assays are still pending for 17RESRC18 and 17RESRC19) - see PDF link
Grandao
A further 10 drill holes for 860m (Figure 4) have been completed targeting the flat lying pegmatite body at Grandao. To date no results have been received for this drilling.
Figure 4. Summary of drilling at Grandao, with historical drill holes and planned drill holes - see PDF link
NOA
Initial drilling results from the NOA prospect have been encouraging with 10-15m wide zones of pegmatite being intersected to date at grades above 1.2% Li₂O over a strike length of 100m and a down dip depth of around 50m (Table 3-4, Figure 5). A further five RC holes are planned to test a further 200m of the strike of the NOA prospect focusing on areas where surface outcrop suggest widths of pegmatite over 20m may be present.
Table 3. Summarised downhole geology for recent NOA Drilling
|
HOLE ID |
SUMMARISED DOWNHOLE GEOLOGY |
|
17NOARC01 |
Pegmatite/Schist 1-5m; Pegmatite 5-10m; Pegmatite/Schist 15-16m; Pegmatite 16-19m; |
|
17NOARC02 |
Pegmatite/Schist 25-29m; Pegmatite/Schist 64-65m; Pegmatite 65-68m |
|
17NOARC03 |
Pegmatite/Schist 6-11m; Pegmatite 11-18m; Pegmatite/Schist 18-20m |
|
17NOARC04 |
Pegmatite/Schist 22-23m; Pegmatite 23-24m; Pegmatite 24-25m; Pegmatite/Schist 45-46m; Pegmatite 46-56m; Pegmatite/Schist 56-57m |
|
17NOARC05 |
Pegmatite/Schist 11-17m; Pegmatite/Schist 72-75m |
Table 4. Summary of drill results for NOA reported at a 0.2% and 0.5% Li2O cut-off
|
Prospect |
Hole ID |
0.2% Li20 Cut Off |
0.5% Li20 Cut Off |
|
NOA |
17NOARC01 |
7m @ 0.52% Li20 from 3m |
3m @0.95@ Li20 from 5m |
|
|
|
5m @ 0.3% Li20 from 15m |
15m @ 0.78% Li20 from 31m |
|
|
|
1m @ 0.25% Li20 from 23m |
|
|
|
|
15m @ 0.78% Li20 from 31m |
|
|
NOA |
17NOARC02 |
3m @ 0.24% Li20 from 25m |
2m @ 1.40% Li20 from 65m |
|
|
|
4m @ 0.82% Li20 from 64m |
|
|
NOA |
17NOARC03 |
13m @ 1.19% Li20 from 7m |
11m @ 1.34% Li20 from 7m |
|
NOA |
17NOARC04 |
2m @ 0.74% Li20 from 23m |
2m @ 0.74% Li20 from 23m |
|
|
|
11m @ 1.23% Li20 from 46m |
10m @ 1.32% Li20 from 46m |
|
NOA |
17NOARC05 |
1m @ 0.21% Li20 from 72m |
No significant results |
Figure 5. Summary of drilling at NOA, with historical drill holes and planned drill holes - see PDF link
Drilling is continuing at both NOA and Grandao and a Mineral Resource Estimate for Reservatorio is expected to be delivered before the end of 2017.
Savannah has a 75% shareholding in Slipstream Resources Portugal Lda, which is the registered holder of the Mina do Barroso mining licence.
Competent Person and Regulatory Information
The information in this announcement that relates to exploration results is based upon information compiled by Mr Dale Ferguson, Technical Director of Savannah Resources Limited. Mr Ferguson is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the December 2012 edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves" (JORC Code). Mr Ferguson consents to the inclusion in the report of the matters based upon the information in the form and context in which it appears.
This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 596/2014.
**ENDS**
For further information please visit www.savannahresources.com or contact:
|
David Archer |
Savannah Resources plc |
Tel: +44 20 7117 2489 |
|
David Hignell / Gerry Beaney (Nominated Adviser) |
Northland Capital Partners Ltd |
Tel: +44 20 3861 6625 |
|
Christopher Raggett / Emily Morris (Joint Broker) |
finnCap Ltd |
Tel: +44 20 7220 0500 |
|
Jon Belliss (Joint Broker) |
Beaufort Securities Ltd |
Tel: +44 20 7382 8300 |
|
Charlotte Page / Lottie Wadham (Financial PR) |
St Brides Partners Ltd |
Tel: +44 20 7236 1177 |
About Savannah
We are a diversified resources group (AIM: SAV) with a portfolio of energy metals projects - lithium in Portugal and copper in Oman - together with the world-class Mutamba Heavy Mineral Sands Project in Mozambique, which is being developed in a consortium with the global major Rio Tinto. We are committed to serving the interests of our shareholders and to delivering outcomes that will improve the lives of our staff and the communities we work with.
APPENDIX 1 - JORC 2012 Table 1
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 (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling. |
· Reverse circulation (HQ size) samples were taken on either 1 intervals for pegmatite or 4m composites in surrounding schist. RC samples were collected in large plastic bags from an on-board rig splitter and a 4-6kg representative sample taken for analysis. |
|
|
· Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representatively and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used. |
· Drilling was conducted on a nominal 80m by 40m spacing based on geological targets using RC drilling technology, an industry standard drilling technique. Drilling rods are 3m long and 1 sample is taken for each rod interval. · Collar surveys are carried using hand held GPS with an accuracy to within 5m, and the z direction was determined by satellite derived elevation data and is accurate to less than a metre. · A downhole survey for each hole was completed |
|
|
· Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. · In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information. |
· The lithium mineralization is predominantly in the form of Spodumene-bearing pegmatites, the pegmatites are unzoned and vary in thickness from 15m-39m. · Down hole sampling is carried out on either a 1 or 4m interval from which 4-6kg of pulverized material (RC) was pulverized to produce a 50g charge for assaying
|
|
Drilling techniques |
· Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc). |
· RC drilling at a diameter of 120mm is a form of reverse circulation drilling requiring annular drill rods. Compressed air is pumped down the outer tube and the sample is collected from the open face drilling bit and blown up the inner tube. |
|
Drill sample recovery |
· Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.
|
· Field assessment of sample volume. A theoretical dried sample mass was estimated to be within the range of 18 kg to 24 Kg, 70% of samples are within the expected range. Lower than average sample recovery is recorded only for the very top of the drill hole due to air and sample losses into the surrounding soil |
|
|
· Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples. |
· RC drilling sample weights were monitored to ensure samples were maximized. Samples were carefully loaded into a splitter and split in the same manner ensuring that the sample split to be sent to the assay laboratories were in the range of 4-6kg. |
|
|
· Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. |
· No obvious relationships
|
|
Logging |
· Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies. · Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. · The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. |
· RC holes were logged in the field at the time of sampling. · Each 1m sample interval was carefully homogenized and assessed for lithology, colour, grainsize, structure and mineralization. · A representative chip sample produced from RC drilling was washed and taken for each 1m sample and stored in a chip tray which was photographed |
|
Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation |
· If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken. · If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. |
· RC samples were split by the rotary splitter on the drill rig and sampled dry |
|
|
· For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. |
· The sampling was conducted using industry standard techniques and were considered appropriate |
|
|
· Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representatively of samples. |
· The 4m composites were collected using a spear with the spear inserted into the bag at a high angle and pushed across the sample to maximise representatively of the sample |
|
|
· Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling. |
· Every effort was made to ensure that the samples were representative and not bias in anyway |
|
|
· Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. |
· All samples were taken once they went through the on-board splitter from the drill rig. Depending on the rock types on average a 4-6kg sample was sent to the lab for analysis and the remaining material averaged 18-24kg and remains stored on site for any further analysis required |
|
Quality of assay data and laboratory tests |
· The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total. |
· Samples were received, sorted, labelled and dried · Samples were crushed to 70% less than 2mm, riffle split off 250g, pulverize split to better than 85% passing 75 microns and 5g was split of for assaying · The samples were analysed using ALS laboratories ME-MS89L Super Trace method which combines a sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-MS instrumentation utilizing collision/reaction cell technologies to provide the lowest detection limits available. · A prepared sample (0.2g) is added to sodium peroxide flux, mixed well and then fused in at 670°C. The resulting melt is cooled and then dissolved in 30% hydrochloric acid. This solution is then analysed by Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry and the results are corrected for spectral inter-element interferences. · The final solution is then analysed by ICP-MS, with results corrected for spectral inter-element interferences. |
|
|
· For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc. |
· Not used |
|
|
· Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established. |
· Standards/blanks and duplicates we inserted on a 1:20 ratio for both to samples taken · Duplicate sample regime is used to monitor sampling methodology and homogeneity. · A powder chip tray for the entire hole is completed for both RC and RAB. A sub-sample is sieved from the large RC bags at site into chip trays over the pegmatite interval to assist in geological logging. These are photographed and kept on the central database · Routine QA/QC controls for the method ME-MS89L include Blanks, certified reference standards of Lithium and duplicate samples. Samples are assayed within runs or batches up to 40 samples. At the fusion stage that quality control samples are included together with the samples so all samples follow the same procedure until the end. Fused and diluted samples are prepared for ICP-MS analysis. ICP instrument is calibrated through appropriate certified standards solutions and interference corrections to achieve strict calibration fitting parameters. Each 40 samples run is assayed with 2 blanks, 2 certified standards and one duplicate samples and results are evaluated accordingly. · A QA/QC review of all information indicated that all assays were inside reasonable tolerance levels. |
|
Verification of sampling and assaying |
· The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel. |
· All information was internally audited by company personnel
|
|
|
· The use of twinned holes. |
· Several historical holes we twinned for comparison purposes with the modern drilling |
|
|
· Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols. |
· Savannah's experienced project geologists are supervised all processes. · All field data is entered into a custom log sheet and then into excel spreadsheets (supported by look-up tables) at site and subsequently validated as it is imported into the centralized Access database. · Hard copies of logs, survey and sampling data are stored in the local office and electronic data is stored on the main server. |
|
|
· Discuss any adjustment to assay data. |
· Results were reported as Li(ppm) and were converted to a percentage by dividing by 10,000 and then to Li2O% by multiplying by 2.153 |
|
Location of data points |
· Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation. · Specification of the grid system used. · Quality and adequacy of topographic control. |
· The coordinate of each drill hole was taken at the time of collecting using a handheld GPS with an accuracy of 5m. · The grid system used is WSG84 · Topographic accuracy was +/- 5m |
|
Data spacing and distribution |
· Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. · Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. · Whether sample compositing has been applied. |
· Drilling was on a nominal 80m by 40m spacing and based on geological targets · Drill data is not currently at sufficient spacing to define a mineral resource. · Some samples were composited on a 4m basis based on geological criteria, these areas were all outside the pegmatite bodies where 1m sampling was completed |
|
Orientation of data in relation to geological structure |
· Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. · If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. |
· Drilling was orientated perpendicular to the known strike of the pegmatites · Drill holes we orientated at either -60 degrees or -90 degrees depending on the dip of the pegmatite in an attempt to get drill holes as close to true width as possible |
|
Sample security |
· The measures taken to ensure sample security. |
· Samples were delivered to a courier and chain of custody is managed by Savannah. |
|
Audits or reviews |
· The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data. |
· Internal company auditing |
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 land tenure status |
· Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings. · The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a license to operate in the area. |
· All work was completed inside the 100% owned Mina do Barroso project C-100
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Exploration done by other parties |
· Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties. |
· N/A |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Geology |
· Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation. |
· The lithium mineralization is predominantly in the form of Spodumene-bearing pegmatites which are hosted in meta-pelitic and mica schists, and occasionally carbonate schists of upper Ordovician to lower Devonian age. The pegmatites are unzoned and vary in thickness from 15m-39m. Lithium is present in most aplite compositions. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Drill hole Information |
· A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes: o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length. · If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. |
· Grid used WSG84 · No material data has been excluded from the release
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Data aggregation methods |
· In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated. · Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail. · The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. |
· Low Grade Intercepts are weighted averages using a 0.2%Li2O cut off with no more than 2m of internal dilution · High Grade Intercepts are weighted averages using a 0.5%Li2O cut off with no more than 2m of internal dilution
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths |
· These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results. · If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported. · If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known'). |
· Exploration results are reported as down hole intercepts · No metal equivalent values have been used. · The drill holes are detailed in the table in the main release and the pegmatite at Reservatorio appears to dip at around 40degrees to the north west and at Grandao it is sub horizontal |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Diagrams |
· Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. |
· Relevant diagrams and maps have been included in the main body of the release. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Balanced reporting |
· Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. |
· All relevant results available have been reported. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other substantive exploration data |
· Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances. |
· The interpretation of the results is consistent with the observations and information obtained from the data collected. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Further work |
· The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling). · Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. |
· Further rock chip sampling, channel sampling and RC drilling. Once planning has been completed the detail will be provided |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This information is provided by RNS
Latest directors dealings
- 6 hours ago ASOS
- 7 hours ago MJ Gleeson
- 7 hours ago Rolls-Royce Holdings
- 7 hours ago Crest Nicholson Holdings
- 8 hours ago Naked Wines